Adapted Motivational Interviewing and Cognitive Behavioural Therapy for Food Addiction
NCT ID: NCT04666831
Last Updated: 2023-11-22
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
NA
94 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2021-03-07
2023-01-21
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
The current study proposes a randomized controlled trial using a four-session adapted motivational interviewing (AMI) and cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) intervention for food addiction. This intervention combines the personalized assessment feedback and person-centred counseling of AMI with CBT skills for eating disorders, such as self-monitoring of food intake. The aim is to motivate participants to enact behavioural change, such as reduced and moderate consumption of processed foods. Outcome measures will assess food addiction and binge eating symptoms, self-reported consumption of processed foods, readiness for change, eating self-efficacy, and other constructs such as emotional eating. The intervention condition will be compared to a waitlist control group. Both groups will be assessed at pre- and postintervention periods, as well as over a 3-month follow-up period to assess maintenance effects. Based on a power analysis and previous effect sizes following AMI interventions for binge eating, a total sample size of n = 58 is needed. A total of 131 individuals will be recruited to account for previous exclusion and withdrawal rates. Participation is estimated to take place from March 2021 to March 2022. All intervention sessions will be conducted virtually over secure videoconferencing technology or telephone, expanding access to all adult community members across Ontario, Canada. Twenty randomly selected session tapes will be reviewed for MI adherence.
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Method: The current study proposes a randomized controlled trial using a four-session AMI and CBT intervention for food addiction. Due to COVID-19 limitations, all intervention sessions will be conducted virtually over secure videoconferencing technology or by telephone, expanding access to all adult community members across the province of Ontario in Canada. The intervention combines the personalized assessment feedback and person-centred counselling of AMI with CBT skills for eating disorders, such as self-monitoring of food intake and stimulus control. The aim is to motivate participants to enact behavioural change, such as moderate consumption of processed foods in a harm reduction approach. Twenty randomly selected session tapes will be reviewed by two trained coders to assess for MI adherence using the most commonly used MI fidelity measure. The intervention condition will be compared to a wait-list control (WLC) group. Both groups will be assessed at pre- and postintervention periods, as well as over a 3-month follow-up period to assess maintenance effects.
Hypotheses
Primary Hypotheses - Food Addiction and Binge Eating Frequency (H1-H3)
* H1: Compared to WLC, AMI will lead to a significantly greater reduction in food addiction symptoms (using the YFAS 2.0) at postintervention and up to 3 months postintervention.
* H2: Compared to WLC, AMI will lead to a significantly greater reduction in self-reported consumption of highly processed foods specified in the YFAS 2.0 (using the Canadian Diet History Questionnaire II) at postintervention and up to 3 months postintervention.
* H3: Compared to WLC, AMI will lead a to significantly greater reduction in number of binge eating episodes (using select Eating Disorder Examination Questionnaire questions) at postintervention and up to 3 months postintervention.
Secondary Hypotheses - Readiness for Change, Eating Self-Efficacy, and Weight Bias Internalization (H4-H6)
* H4: Compared to WLC, AMI will lead to a greater increase in motivation for changing one's food addiction symptoms (e.g., reducing consumption of highly processed foods; using Motivational Rulers) at postintervention.
* H5: Compared to WLC, AMI will lead to a significantly greater increase in eating self-efficacy (using the Weight Efficacy Lifestyle Questionnaire) at postintervention.
* H6: Compared to WLC, AMI will lead to a greater reduction in weight bias internalization (using the Modified Weight Bias Internalization Scale) at postintervention.
Secondary Hypotheses - Other Eating-Related Constructs (H7-H14)
It is hypothesized that AMI will lead to significantly greater reductions in other eating-related constructs compared to WLC at postintervention and up to 3 months postintervention, in terms of:
* H7: self-identified food addiction,
* H8: addiction-like eating behaviour (AEBS),
* H9: binge eating symptoms (Binge Eating Scale),
* H10: loss-of-control eating (Loss of Control over Eating Scale),
* H11: emotional eating (Emotional Eating Scale),
* H12: general appetite for palatable foods or hedonic hunger (Power of Food Scale),
* H13: cravings for specific highly processed foods (Food Craving Inventory),
* H14: Body Mass Index (BMI)
Tertiary Hypothesis - Working Alliance (H15-17)
Given that a collaborative partnership is key component of MI and that there is a robust positive association between working alliance and treatment outcomes, it is hypothesized that there will be positive associations between postintervention working alliance (using the Working Alliance Scale Short Form Revised) and postintervention motivation for change (H15), eating self-efficacy (H16), and weight bias internalization (H17).
Sample Size: Based on a power analysis and previous effect sizes following AMI interventions for binge eating (Cohen's d = 0.76), a total sample size of n = 58 is needed. Accounting for previous withdrawal rates and an inclusion rate of 44.6% in a similar study, a total of 131 individuals should be recruited. Recruitment is estimated to take place over 5 months beginning in March 2021. Given the 3-month follow-up, participation is estimated to end in March 2022.
Analyses: To determine whether both AMI and WLC groups are equivalent in terms of sample characteristics as a result of randomization, independent samples t tests will be conducted on baseline variables such as age, BMI, YFAS severity, and binge eating frequency. To determine whether sample characteristics differ between treatment completers and dropouts, independent samples t tests will be conducted on the same baseline variables and working alliance. Lastly, to determine if equal proportions dropped out of the AMI and WLC groups, a chi square test will be conducted.
Primary, Secondary, and Tertiary Outcomes: For the primary outcomes (i.e., YFAS symptoms, binge eating frequency, and consumption of highly processed foods), given the between-groups and repeated-measures mixed design, a 2 (group: WLC vs. AMI) x 4 (time: baseline, postintervention, and 1- and-, 3-month follow-up) mixed analysis of variance (ANOVA) will be conducted on SPSS statistical software. For the secondary outcomes (i.e., readiness for change, eating self-efficacy, and weight bias internalization), a 2 (group: WLC vs. AMI) x 2 (time: baseline, postintervention) mixed ANOVA will be used to compare the WLC and AMI groups from pre- to postintervention. For the other secondary eating-related outcomes, the same 2 (group) x 4 (time) mixed ANOVAs described above will be used to compare WLC and AMI groups across time. For the tertiary outcomes, to determine if there is a positive association between working alliance and readiness for change, eating self-efficacy, and weight bias internalization, two-tailed, bivariate, Pearson's correlation analyses will be performed. To explore the changes in readiness for change, eating self-efficacy, weight bias internalization, and working alliance from pre- to postintervention, paired samples t tests will be used for the AMI group for these four constructs. Prior to data analyses, data will be checked for bias and corrected as necessary. Any interactions from the ANOVAs will be followed up with planned contrasts, with the control group and baseline as the base categories for the between-groups and repeated-measures variables, respectively.
Assuming that there are no valid reasons to ignore missing data and to conduct complete case analysis (e.g., if less than 5% of data are missing), and assuming that data are missing at random, multiple imputation will be conducted on SPSS for the missing values, with at least 50 imputed datasets in order to reduce sampling variability in the imputation process. Results from complete case analyses and multiple imputation analyses will be compared for differences. To reduce bias of the imputation model, the model will include any variables that predict missing data. SPSS will automatically scan the data for a monotone pattern of missing values, and if such a pattern is present, a monotonic multiple imputation will be conducted. The default number of iterations per missing variable used will be 10 but at least 50 imputed datasets will be computed. If data are not assumed to be missing at random, sensitivity analyses will be performed for missing binary data.
Satisfaction Evaluation: Descriptive statistics will be obtained for the three quantitative satisfaction questions (e.g., an average score for how satisfied participants were with the research study). Qualitative responses from the open-ended questions will be analysed as per thematic analysis methodology.
Treatment Adherence: The minimum threshold of MI adherence will be based on the Motivational Interviewing Treatment Integrity Code (MITI) basic competence and proficiency thresholds for clinicians. Specifically, summary scores must fall in at least the "fair" scores (i.e., the Relational score must be 3.5/5, the Technical score must be 3/5, 40% of the reflections must be complex reflections, and the reflection-to-question ratio must be 1:1). If all four domains meet these thresholds, then the session will be rated as 100% fairly adherent, which will be the minimum goal. An average percentage of "fair" adherence across raters and tapes will be calculated to determine if sessions met this threshold. To determine interrater reliability for each summary score, a two-way mixed-effects model, using the mean of two raters (k = 2) and absolute agreement will be used. Intraclass correlation coefficients and their 95% confidence intervals will be reported from the SPSS output.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
TREATMENT
NONE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
AMI and CBT Intervention
Participants will receive four weekly sessions of individual therapy (60 minutes) with a graduate student therapist over videoconferencing technology or telephone. The intervention combines Adapted Motivational Interviewing (AMI) and Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT) techniques for food addiction. Participants will complete questionnaires at baseline, postintervention or 1-month postbaseline, and 2- and 4-months postbaseline.
Adapted Motivational Interviewing (AMI) and Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT)
The intervention combines AMI techniques as described by Miller and Rollnick (2013) in the third edition of their Motivational Interviewing book, as well as CBT techniques from the Tele-CBT protocol for bariatric surgery patients by Cassin et al. (2013).
Waitlist Control
Participants will complete questionnaires at baseline, 1-month postbaseline, and 2- and 4-months postbaseline (at timepoints comparable to the intervention arm). They will not receive any intervention during this time. Following the 3-month waitlist, they will cross over into the same procedure as the intervention arm.
No interventions assigned to this group
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Adapted Motivational Interviewing (AMI) and Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT)
The intervention combines AMI techniques as described by Miller and Rollnick (2013) in the third edition of their Motivational Interviewing book, as well as CBT techniques from the Tele-CBT protocol for bariatric surgery patients by Cassin et al. (2013).
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Fluent in English
* 18 years or older
* Have access to e-mail
* Have access to high speed internet and Zoom OR telephone
* Have private space to conduct remote therapy sessions
* Must live in the province of Ontario, Canada
Exclusion Criteria
18 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
The Jackman Foundation
UNKNOWN
BMS Canada Risk Services Ltd.
UNKNOWN
Canadian Psychological Association
UNKNOWN
Council of Professional Associations of Psychology
UNKNOWN
Toronto Metropolitan University
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Vincent Santiago, MA
Principal Investigator
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Stephanie E Cassin, PhD
Role: STUDY_DIRECTOR
Toronto Metropolitan University
Vincent A Santiago, MA
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Toronto Metropolitan University
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Toronto Metropolitan University
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Dunn EC, Neighbors C, Larimer ME. Motivational enhancement therapy and self-help treatment for binge eaters. Psychol Addict Behav. 2006 Mar;20(1):44-52. doi: 10.1037/0893-164X.20.1.44.
Sterne JA, White IR, Carlin JB, Spratt M, Royston P, Kenward MG, Wood AM, Carpenter JR. Multiple imputation for missing data in epidemiological and clinical research: potential and pitfalls. BMJ. 2009 Jun 29;338:b2393. doi: 10.1136/bmj.b2393.
Field, A. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics. Sage Publications Ltd.
Gearhardt AN, Corbin WR, Brownell KD. Development of the Yale Food Addiction Scale Version 2.0. Psychol Addict Behav. 2016 Feb;30(1):113-21. doi: 10.1037/adb0000136.
Ifland JR, Preuss HG, Marcus MT, Rourke KM, Taylor WC, Burau K, Jacobs WS, Kadish W, Manso G. Refined food addiction: a classic substance use disorder. Med Hypotheses. 2009 May;72(5):518-26. doi: 10.1016/j.mehy.2008.11.035. Epub 2009 Feb 14.
Kramer H. Kidney Disease and the Westernization and Industrialization of Food. Am J Kidney Dis. 2017 Jul;70(1):111-121. doi: 10.1053/j.ajkd.2016.11.012. Epub 2017 Jan 23.
Moss, M. (2013, February 20). The extraordinary science of addictive junk food. New York Times Magazine. https://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/24/magazine/the-extraordinary-science-of-junk-food.html
American Psychiatric Association [APA]. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.books.9780890425596
Hauck C, Weiss A, Schulte EM, Meule A, Ellrott T. Prevalence of 'Food Addiction' as Measured with the Yale Food Addiction Scale 2.0 in a Representative German Sample and Its Association with Sex, Age and Weight Categories. Obes Facts. 2017;10(1):12-24. doi: 10.1159/000456013. Epub 2017 Feb 11.
Schulte EM, Gearhardt AN. Associations of Food Addiction in a Sample Recruited to Be Nationally Representative of the United States. Eur Eat Disord Rev. 2018 Mar;26(2):112-119. doi: 10.1002/erv.2575. Epub 2017 Dec 21.
Meadows A, Nolan LJ, Higgs S. Self-perceived food addiction: Prevalence, predictors, and prognosis. Appetite. 2017 Jul 1;114:282-298. doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2017.03.051. Epub 2017 Apr 3.
Russell-Mayhew S, von Ranson KM, Masson PC. How does overeaters anonymous help its members? A qualitative analysis. Eur Eat Disord Rev. 2010 Jan;18(1):33-42. doi: 10.1002/erv.966.
Schulte EM, Grilo CM, Gearhardt AN. Shared and unique mechanisms underlying binge eating disorder and addictive disorders. Clin Psychol Rev. 2016 Mar;44:125-139. doi: 10.1016/j.cpr.2016.02.001. Epub 2016 Feb 4.
Cassin, S. E., Sijercic, I., & Montemarano, V. (2020). Psychosocial interventions for food addiction: A systematic review. Current Addiction Reports, 7, 9-19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40429-020-00295-y
de Jong M, Schoorl M, Hoek HW. Enhanced cognitive behavioural therapy for patients with eating disorders: a systematic review. Curr Opin Psychiatry. 2018 Nov;31(6):436-444. doi: 10.1097/YCO.0000000000000452.
Knowles L, Anokhina A, Serpell L. Motivational interventions in the eating disorders: what is the evidence? Int J Eat Disord. 2013 Mar;46(2):97-107. doi: 10.1002/eat.22053. Epub 2012 Sep 24.
Smedslund G, Berg RC, Hammerstrom KT, Steiro A, Leiknes KA, Dahl HM, Karlsen K. Motivational interviewing for substance abuse. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011 May 11;2011(5):CD008063. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008063.pub2.
Treasure J, Leslie M, Chami R, Fernandez-Aranda F. Are trans diagnostic models of eating disorders fit for purpose? A consideration of the evidence for food addiction. Eur Eat Disord Rev. 2018 Mar;26(2):83-91. doi: 10.1002/erv.2578. Epub 2018 Jan 17.
Miller, W. R., & Rollnick, S. (2013). Applications of motivational interviewing. Motivational interviewing: Helping people change (3rd ed.). Guilford Press.
Magill M, Gaume J, Apodaca TR, Walthers J, Mastroleo NR, Borsari B, Longabaugh R. The technical hypothesis of motivational interviewing: a meta-analysis of MI's key causal model. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2014 Dec;82(6):973-83. doi: 10.1037/a0036833. Epub 2014 May 19.
Magill M, Apodaca TR, Borsari B, Gaume J, Hoadley A, Gordon REF, Tonigan JS, Moyers T. A meta-analysis of motivational interviewing process: Technical, relational, and conditional process models of change. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2018 Feb;86(2):140-157. doi: 10.1037/ccp0000250. Epub 2017 Dec 21.
Burmeister JM, Hinman N, Koball A, Hoffmann DA, Carels RA. Food addiction in adults seeking weight loss treatment. Implications for psychosocial health and weight loss. Appetite. 2013 Jan;60(1):103-110. doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2012.09.013. Epub 2012 Sep 24.
Cassin SE, Buchman DZ, Leung SE, Kantarovich K, Hawa A, Carter A, Sockalingam S. Ethical, Stigma, and Policy Implications of Food Addiction: A Scoping Review. Nutrients. 2019 Mar 27;11(4):710. doi: 10.3390/nu11040710.
Reid, J., O'Brien, K. S., Puhl, R., Hardman, C. A., & Carter, A. (2018). Food addiction and its potential links with weight stigma. Current Addiction Reports, 5(2), 192-201. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40429-018-0205-z
Cassin SE, von Ranson KM, Heng K, Brar J, Wojtowicz AE. Adapted motivational interviewing for women with binge eating disorder: a randomized controlled trial. Psychol Addict Behav. 2008 Sep;22(3):417-25. doi: 10.1037/0893-164X.22.3.417.
Moyers, T. B., Manuel, J. K., & Ernst, D. (2015). Motivational Interviewing Treatment Integrity Coding Manual 4.2.1. Center on Alcoholism, Substance Abuse, & Addictions [Unpublished manual]. https://casaa.unm.edu/codinginst.html
Fluckiger C, Del Re AC, Wampold BE, Horvath AO. The alliance in adult psychotherapy: A meta-analytic synthesis. Psychotherapy (Chic). 2018 Dec;55(4):316-340. doi: 10.1037/pst0000172. Epub 2018 May 24.
IBM Corp. (n.d.). Impute missing data values (multiple imputation). IBM Knowledge Center. https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/en/SSLVMB_24.0.0/spss/mva/idh_idd_mi_variables.html
Jakobsen JC, Gluud C, Wetterslev J, Winkel P. When and how should multiple imputation be used for handling missing data in randomised clinical trials - a practical guide with flowcharts. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2017 Dec 6;17(1):162. doi: 10.1186/s12874-017-0442-1.
Nowell, L. S., Norris, J. M., White, D. E., & Moules, N. J. (2017). Thematic analysis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16(1), 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847
Koo TK, Li MY. A Guideline of Selecting and Reporting Intraclass Correlation Coefficients for Reliability Research. J Chiropr Med. 2016 Jun;15(2):155-63. doi: 10.1016/j.jcm.2016.02.012. Epub 2016 Mar 31.
Moyers TB, Rowell LN, Manuel JK, Ernst D, Houck JM. The Motivational Interviewing Treatment Integrity Code (MITI 4): Rationale, Preliminary Reliability and Validity. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2016 Jun;65:36-42. doi: 10.1016/j.jsat.2016.01.001. Epub 2016 Jan 13.
Cassin, S. E., Sockalingam, S., Wnuk, S., Strimas, R., Royal, S., Hawa, R., & Parikh, S. V. (2013). Cognitive behavioral therapy for bariatric surgery patients: Preliminary evidence for feasibility, acceptability, and effectiveness. Cognitive and Behavioral Practice, 20(4), 529-543. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cbpra.2012.10.002
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
REB 2020-517
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id