Skip to main content

Table 17 Cognitive behavioural therapy for Bulimia Nervosa

From: Canadian practice guidelines for the treatment of children and adolescents with eating disorders

Certainty assessmentImpactCertaintyImportance
№ of studiesStudy designRisk of biasInconsistencyIndirectnessImprecisionOther considerations
CBT vs FBT - Remission (assessed with: abstinence from BP for 4 weeks)
 2randomised trialsnot seriousnot seriousnot seriousnot seriousnoneRCT n = 130 aged 12–18 years. 18 sessions over 6 months. 20% remitted in CBT group versus 39% remitted in FBT group (p < 0.04, NNT = 5). RCT n = 85 (guided self care CBT) remitted 6/44 in CBT group versus 4/41 in family group. no significant difference.
HIGH
CRITICAL
CBT vs. Psychodynamic - Remission Rates (assessed with: Diagnostic Criteria)
 1randomised trialsnot seriousnot seriousnot seriousnot seriousnoneone RCT 81 females mean age 18.7 years (range 14–20). 33.3% remitted in the CBT group and 31.0% in the psychodynamic group. No significant differences.
Mean of 37 sessions. Both groups improved, there were small between groups effect sizes for binge eating (d = 0.23) and purging (d = 0.26) in favour of CBT and for eating concern (d = 0.35) in favour of PDT.

HIGH
CRITICAL
Binge Purge Behaviour (assessed with: EDE)
 2Case Seriesvery serious a,bnot seriousnot seriousnot seriousnoneTwo large case series (n = 68 including 2 males, 66 females, and n = 34 all female). Total age range 12–19. Number of sessions 16–20. Frequency of binge and purge episodes decreased significantly pre to post treatment.
VERY LOW
CRITICAL
very serious a,bnot seriousnot seriousnot seriousnoneCase series of 68 adolescents - EDE significantly improved global EDE score from 3.6 to 1.8 from pre to post treatment.
VERY LOW
CRITICAL
Binge Purge Frequency (assessed with: Frequency), Psychological Symptoms (EDE or EAT)
 5Case Reportsvery serious a,bnot seriousnot seriousnot seriousnoneCase reports involving 9 patients in total. Frequency of binge and purge behaviours described as decreased.
VERY LOW
CRITICAL
very serious a,bnot seriousnot seriousnot seriousnone7 cases -EDE or EAT significantly improved.
VERY LOW
CRITICAL
  1. Explanations
  2. ano randomization
  3. bno control condition
  4. Bibliography:
  5. RCT – Le Grange 2015 [50], Schmidt 2007 [49] (CBT vs. FBT) Stefini 2017 [107] (CBT vs. psychodynamic)
  6. Case Series - Dalle Grave 2015 [108], Lock 2005 [109]
  7. Case Reports – Schapman-Williams 2006 [110], Cooper 2007 [111], Anbar 2005 [112], Schapman-Williams 2007 [113], Sysko 2011 [114]