Latent profile analysis reveals the central role of psychological symptoms in driving disease severity in chronic constipation

BACKGROUND

Chronic constipation (CC) is defined by symptom criteria reflecting heterogenous physiology. However, many patients with CC have significant psychological comorbidities-an alternative definition using a biopsychosocial classification model could be warranted to inform future treatments. We sought to: (1) empirically derive psychological symptom profiles of patients with CC using latent profile analysis and (2) validate these profiles by comparing them on symptom severity, GI-specific anxiety, body mass index (BMI), and anorectal manometry findings.

METHODS

Participants included adults presenting for anorectal manometry for CC (N = 468, 82% female, Mage = 47). Depression/anxiety symptoms and eating disorder (ED) symptoms (EAT-26) were used as indicators (i.e., variables used to derive profiles) representing unique psychological constructs. Constipation symptoms, GI-specific anxiety, BMI, and anorectal manometry results were used as validators (i.e., variables used to examine the clinical utility of the resulting profiles).

KEY RESULTS

A 5-profile solution provided the best statistical fit, comprising the following latent profiles (LPs): LP1 termed "high dieting, low bulimia;" LP2 termed "high ED symptoms;" LP3 termed "moderate ED symptoms;" LP4 termed "high anxiety and depression, low ED symptoms;" and LP5 termed "low psychological symptoms." The low psychological symptom profile (61% of the sample) had lower abdominal and overall constipation severity and lower GI-specific anxiety compared to the four profiles characterized by higher psychological symptoms (of any type). Profiles did not significantly differ on BMI or anorectal manometry results.

CONCLUSIONS AND INFERENCES

Profiles with high psychological symptoms had increased constipation symptom severity and GI-specific anxiety in adults with CC. Future research should test whether these profiles predict differential treatment outcomes.

Avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder prevalence is high in children with gastroparesis and functional dyspepsia

BACKGROUND

Avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder (ARFID) prevalence in children with gastroparesis (Gp) and/or functional dyspepsia (FD) is unknown. We aimed to identify ARFID prevalence and trajectory over 2 months in children with Gp, FD, and healthy children (HC) using two screening questionnaires. We also explored the frequency of a positive ARFID screen between those with/without delayed gastric emptying or abnormal fundic accommodation.

METHODS

In this prospective longitudinal study conducted at an urban tertiary care hospital, patients ages 10-17 years with Gp or FD and age- and gender-matched HC completed two validated ARFID screening tools at baseline and 2-month follow-up: the Nine Item ARFID Screen (NIAS) and the Pica, ARFID, and Rumination Disorder Interview-ARFID Questionnaire (PARDI-AR-Q). Gastric retention and fundic accommodation (for Gp and FD) were determined from gastric emptying scintigraphy.

KEY RESULTS

At baseline, the proportion of children screening positive for ARFID on the NIAS versus PARDI-AR-Q was Gp: 48.5% versus 63.6%, FD: 66.7% versus 65.2%, HC: 15.3% versus 9.7%, respectively; p < 0.0001 across groups. Of children who screened positive at baseline and participated in the follow-up, 71.9% and 53.3% were positive 2 months later (NIAS versus PARDI-AR-Q, respectively). A positive ARFID screen in Gp or FD was not related to the presence/absence of delayed gastric retention or abnormal fundic accommodation.

CONCLUSIONS & INFERENCES

ARFID detected from screening questionnaires is highly prevalent among children with Gp and FD and persists for at least 2 months in a substantial proportion of children. Children with these disorders should be screened for ARFID.

Avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder symptoms are not as frequent as other eating disorder symptoms when ulcerative colitis is in remission

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Recent studies have shown that up to 53% of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) screen positive for avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder (ARFID). There is however concern that ARFID screening rates are over-inflated in patients with active disease. We aimed to evaluate the frequency and characteristics of ARFID symptoms using the Nine Item ARFID Screen (NIAS), and to use another eating disorder measure, the Eating Disorder Examination-Questionnaire 8 (EDE-Q8), to rule-out/characterize other eating disorder cognitive and behavioral symptoms.

METHODS

Participants included adults with UC who are enrolled in an in an ongoing cohort study with quiescent UC (SCCAI ≤2 or fecal calprotectin <150 µg/g with corticosteroid-free clinical remission for ≥ 3 months) at baseline. We used self-reported data on demographics, gastrointestinal medications, medical comorbidities, NIAS scores, and other eating disorder symptom scores (8-item Eating Disorder Examination-Questionnaire; EDE-Q-8).

RESULTS

We included 101 participants who completed the NIAS at their baseline cohort assessment (age 49.9±16.5 years; 55% female). Eleven participants (11%) screened positively for ARFID on at least one NIAS subscale (n=8 male). Up to thirty participants (30%) screened positive for other eating disorder symptoms (EDE-Q-8 Global ≥2.3). Overall score distributions on the EDE-Q-8 showed that participants scored highest on the Weight Concern and Shape Concern subscales.

CONCLUSIONS

Among adults with UC in remission, we found a low rate of ARFID symptoms by the NIAS but a high rate of positive screens for other eating disorder symptoms.

Presence and characteristics of disordered eating and orthorexia in irritable bowel syndrome

INTRODUCTION

Orthorexia, a harmful obsession with eating healthily, may develop from illnesses characterized by dietary restriction, including irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) and eating disorders (ED). Evidence of disordered eating in IBS exists, but orthorexia has not been assessed. This cross-sectional study in adults (≥18 years) assessed presence and characteristics of disordered eating and orthorexia in IBS, compared to control subjects (CS) and ED.

METHODS

IBS participants met Rome IV, and ED participants met DSM-5 criteria. Disordered eating was assessed using "sick, control, one-stone, fat, food" (SCOFF, ≥2 indicating disordered eating), and orthorexia by the eating habits questionnaire (EHQ). Secondary measures included stress (PSS); anxiety (HADS-A); food-related quality of life (Fr-QoL), and dietary intake (CNAQ).

KEY RESULTS

In 202 IBS (192 female), 34 ED (34 female), and 109 CS (90 female), more IBS (33%) and ED (47%) scored SCOFF≥2 compared to CS (16%, p < 0.001, chi-square). IBS and ED had higher orthorexia symptom severity compared to CS (EHQ IBS 82.9 ± 18.1, ED 90.1 ± 19.6, and CS 73.5 ± 16.9, p < 0.001, one-way ANOVA). IBS and ED did not differ for SCOFF or EHQ (p > 0.05). Those with IBS and disordered eating had higher orthorexia symptom severity (EHQ 78.2 ± 16.6 vs. 92.4 ± 17.5, p < 0.001, independent t-test), worse symptoms (IBS-SSS 211.0 ± 78.4 vs. 244.4 ± 62.5, p = 0.008, Mann-Whitney U test), higher stress (p < 0.001, independent t-test), higher anxiety (p = 0.002, independent t-test), and worse FR-QoL (p < 0.001, independent t-test).

CONCLUSIONS AND INFERENCES

Disordered eating and orthorexia symptoms occur frequently in IBS, particularly in those with worse gastrointestinal symptoms, higher stress, and anxiety. Clinicians could consider these characteristics when prescribing dietary therapies.

Age, Race, Ethnicity, and Sex of Participants in Clinical Trials Focused on Chronic Pain

There is limited data on equitable inclusion in chronic pain trials. We aimed to 1) identify the frequency of reporting age, race, ethnicity, and sex in clinical trials targeting chronic pain, and 2) compare sociodemographic representation to the United States (US) population. We examined US-based intervention trials for chronic pain initiated between 2007 and 2021 and registered on ClinicalTrials.gov. We 1) assessed the frequency of reporting each demographic variable, 2) compared representation with US population estimates, and 3) explored change in reporting over time. Of 501 clinical trials, the frequency of reporting was as follows: 36.9% reported older adults, 54.3% reported race, 37.4% reported ethnicity, and 100% reported sex. Rates of race and ethnicity reporting increased, but older adult age reporting decreased over time (ps < .00001). Compared to 2020 US population estimates, there was an equitable representation of older adults, under-representation of individuals identifying as American Indian or Alaska Native (.8% vs .6%), Asian (5.6% vs 2.9%), Black or African American (12.6% vs 12.2%), with more than one race (2.9% vs 1.2%), and Hispanic/Latino (16.9% vs 14.1%). There was an over-representation of individuals identifying as Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander (.2% vs .5%) or White (70.4% vs 72.9%), and of females (50.8% vs 68.4%). Some representation rates varied by chronic pain condition. Reporting of older adult age, race, and ethnicity was low in chronic pain trials in ClinicalTrials.gov, reinforcing the need for adhering to reporting guidelines. Representation varied across trials compared with US population data, particularly among those identifying as Hispanic/Latino and certain minority racial groups. PERSPECTIVE: Despite initiatives to increase the reporting of demographic information, doing so in clinical pain trials is far from ubiquitous. Moreover, efforts to improve diversity in these trials continue to be insufficient. Indeed, Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) remain under-represented in clinical pain trials.

Cognitive-behavioral therapy for avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder: A proof-of-concept for mechanisms of change and target engagement

BACKGROUND

Cognitive-behavioral therapy for avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder (ARFID; CBT-AR) theoretically targets three prototypic motivations (sensory sensitivity, lack of interest/low appetite, fear of aversive consequences), aligned with three modularized interventions. As an exploratory investigation, we: (1) evaluated change in candidate mechanisms in relationship to change in ARFID severity, and (2) tested if assignment (vs. not) to a module resulted in larger improvements in the corresponding mechanism.

METHOD

Males and females (N = 42; 10-55 years) participated in an open trial of CBT-AR.

RESULTS

Decreases in scaled scores for each candidate mechanism had medium to large correlations with decreases in ARFID severity-sensory sensitivity: -0.7 decrease (r = .42, p = .01); lack of interest/low appetite: -0.3 decrease (r = .60, p < .0001); and fear of aversive consequences: -1.1 decrease (r = .33, p = .05). Linear mixed models revealed significant weekly improvements for each candidate mechanism across the full sample (ps < .0001). There were significant interactions for the sensory and fear of aversive consequences modules-for each, participants who received the corresponding module had significantly larger decreases in the candidate mechanism than those who did not receive the module.

DISCUSSION

Sensory sensitivity and fear of aversive consequences improved more if the CBT-AR module was received, but lack of interest/low appetite may improve regardless of receipt of the corresponding module. Future research is needed to test target engagement in CBT-AR with adaptive treatment designs, and to identify valid and sensitive measures of candidate mechanisms.

PUBLIC SIGNIFICANCE

The mechanisms through which components of CBT-AR work have yet to be elucidated. We conducted an exploratory investigation to test if assignment (vs. not) to a CBT-AR module resulted in larger improvements in the corresponding prototypic ARFID motivation that the module intended to target. Measures of the sensory sensitivity and the fear of aversive consequences motivations improved more in those who received the corresponding treatment module, whereas the lack of interest/low appetite measure improved regardless of if the corresponding module was received.

Assessing the presence and motivations of orthorexia nervosa among athletes and adults with eating disorders: a cross-sectional study

PURPOSE

Orthorexia nervosa involves restricting diet based on quality rather than quantity. Although orthorexia is well reported in many at-risk populations, limited data addresses its presence in individuals with eating disorder history (EDs) or athletes. We aimed to identify the presence and potential drivers of orthorexia in adults with EDs and endurance athletes, compared to control subjects.

METHODS

Participants ≥ 18y included: people with a diagnosed eating disorder (ED as per DSM-5); endurance athletes (training/competing ≥ 5 h/week); or control subjects. Participants (n = 197) completed an online survey assessing orthorexia (eating habits questionnaire, EHQ), eating motivations (TEMS-B) and compulsive exercise (CET).

RESULTS

ED had the highest orthorexia symptom severity (92.0 ± 3.02, n = 32), followed by athletes (76.2 ± 2.74, n = 54) and controls (71.0 ± 1.80, n = 111) (F (2) = 18.2, p < 0.001). A strong positive correlation existed between weight control motives and higher orthorexia symptom severity (r = 0.54, 95% CI [1.35, 2.36], p < 0.001), while a weak negative association existed between Hunger and Pleasure motives and higher orthorexia symptom severity (r = 0.23, 95% CI [- 2.24, - 0.34], p = 0.008; r = 0.26, 95% CI [- 2.11, - 0.47], p = 0.002, respectively). A moderate positive relationship was found between CET and orthorexia symptom severity (95% CI [1.52, 3.12], p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Adults with ED history and endurance athletes have greater orthorexia symptom severity compared to control. Clinicians working with at-risk populations should screen patients and be aware of red-flags of orthorexic traits, desire to control weight, and compulsive exercise behavior.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III: Evidence obtained from cohort studies.