Article

The MOSAIC study - comparison of the Maudsley Model of Treatment for Adults with Anorexia Nervosa (MANTRA) with Specialist Supportive Clinical Management (SSCM) in outpatients with anorexia nervosa or eating disorder not otherwise specified, anorexia nervosa type: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Trials (Impact Factor: 2.12). 05/2013; 14(1):160. DOI: 10.1186/1745-6215-14-160
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: Anorexia nervosa (AN) is a biologically based serious mental disorder with high levels of mortality and disability, physical and psychological morbidity and impaired quality of life. AN is one of the leading causes of disease burden in terms of years of life lost through death or disability in young women. Psychotherapeutic interventions are the treatment of choice for AN, but the results of psychotherapy depend critically on the stage of the illness. The treatment response in adults with a chronic form of the illness is poor and drop-out from treatment is high. Despite the seriousness of the disorder the evidence-base for psychological treatment of adults with AN is extremely limited and there is no leading treatment. There is therefore an urgent need to develop more effective treatments for adults with AN. The aim of the Maudsley Outpatient Study of Treatments for Anorexia Nervosa and Related Conditions (MOSAIC) is to evaluate the efficacy and cost effectiveness of two outpatient treatments for adults with AN, Specialist Supportive Clinical Management (SSCM) and the Maudsley Model of Treatment for Adults with Anorexia Nervosa (MANTRA). METHODS: 138 patients meeting the inclusion criteria are randomly assigned to one of the two treatment groups (MANTRA or SSCM). All participants receive 20 once-weekly individual therapy sessions (with 10 extra weekly sessions for those who are severely ill) and four follow-up sessions with monthly spacing thereafter. There is also optional access to a dietician and extra sessions involving a family member or a close other. Body weight, eating disorder- related symptoms, neurocognitive and psychosocial measures, and service use data are measured during the course of treatment and across a one year follow up period. The primary outcome measure is body mass index (BMI) taken at twelve months after randomization. DISCUSSION: This multi-center study provides a large sample size, broad inclusion criteria and a follow-up period. However, the study has to contend with difficulties directly related to running a large multi-center randomized controlled trial and the psychopathology of AN. These issues are discussed.Trial Registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN67720902 - A Maudsley outpatient study of treatments for anorexia nervosa and related conditions.

1 Bookmark
 · 
181 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: BackgroundThis study aimed to assess differences in Quality of Life (QoL) across eating disorder (ED) diagnoses, and to examine the relationship of QoL to specific clinical features.Results199 patients with a diagnosed ED completed the Clinical Impairment Assessment (CIA) [Cognitive Behavior Therapy and Eating Disorders, 315–318, 2008] and the Eating Disorders Examination (EDE) [Int J Eat Disord 6:1–8]. Differences between diagnostic groups were examined, as were differences between restrictive and binge-purge subtypes.CIA scores and EDE scores were positively correlated and higher in groups with binge-purge behaviours. CIA scores were not correlated with BMI, illness duration or frequency of bingeing/purging behaviours, except in the binge-purge AN group, where CIA scores negatively correlated with BMI.ConclusionsPatients with EDs have poor QoL and impairment increases with illness severity. Patients with binge/purge diagnoses are particularly impaired. It remains unclear which clinical features best predict the degree of impairment experienced by patients with EDs.
    International Journal of Eating Disorders 11/2013; 1:43. DOI:10.1186/2050-2974-1-43 · 3.03 Impact Factor
    This article is viewable in ResearchGate's enriched format
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Illness-associated costs are a major concern in eating disorders (ED). Economic aspects of (ED) have been an area receiving research attention. In the last three years a number of studies have been completed, including studies examining national costs of ED; third party payer costs for ED treatment; societal costs of ED; and cost effectiveness analysis of specific treatments. Additionally, some work has been done to model costs associated with ED prevention efforts. A number of further cost effectiveness analyses are planned. This area will be a fertile one for continued study.
    Current Psychiatry Reports 07/2014; 16(7):454. DOI:10.1007/s11920-014-0454-z · 3.05 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Forming part of a process evaluation of a large randomised controlled trial (the Maudsley Outpatient Study of Treatments for Anorexia Nervosa and Related conditions, MOSAIC) comparing two outpatient therapies for Anorexia Nervosa (AN), the Maudsley Model for Treatment of Adults with Anorexia Nervosa (MANTRA) and Specialist Supportive Clinical Management (SSCM), this study adopted a qualitative approach to examine therapist experiences of treatment delivery. Twenty MOSAIC therapists completed semi-structured interviews. Interviews were recorded, transcribed and analysed thematically. Themes of positive aspects, challenges and therapeutic fit emerged. MANTRA was seen as structured and flexible but could feel demanding on therapist time and skill. The slow pace and narrower focus of SSCM gave patients space to talk, but the lack of psychological tools and nutritional emphasis could create frustration. Views on the therapeutic relationship and patient-therapy fit differed across treatments. Findings provide testable hypotheses about what works for whom, ideas for therapist training, treatment development and delivery. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and Eating Disorders Association.
    European Eating Disorders Review 03/2014; 22(2). DOI:10.1002/erv.2278 · 1.38 Impact Factor

Full-text (3 Sources)

Download
66 Downloads
Available from
May 30, 2014