MedPath

Ameliorating Cognitive Control in Binge Eating Disorder

Not Applicable
Completed
Conditions
Binge-Eating Disorder
Interventions
Other: Behavioral training and verum stimulation
Other: Behavioral training and sham stimulation
Registration Number
NCT04572087
Lead Sponsor
Prof. Dr. Katrin Giel
Brief Summary

There is evidence that impairment of impulse regulation is involved in the development and maintenance of eating disorders, especially in Binge Eating Disorder (BED). BED is characterized by recurrent episodes of binge eating with experienced loss of control over eating. Controlling impulsive behaviour, cognitive flexibility, planning and decision making are key abilities of impulse regulation. Some of these impaired cognitive functions are linked to decreased activity of certain brain regions. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a well-established method to alter brain activity. In the current project, we explore if a computer-assisted training programme for patients with BED that is combined with tDCS is feasible and able to ameliorate impulse regulation and impulsive eating behaviour. We hypothesize that the cognitive training programme with additional tDCS will result in a greater decrease of BED symptoms and a stronger increase in impulse regulation skills compared with the cognitive training programme without tDCS by using a placebo stimulation.

Detailed Description

Patients with BED form a subgroup of obese patients with a disinhibited eating pattern that is associated with major impairments in cognitive control. The dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (dlPFC) has been identified as a brain region closely tied to cognitive control processes and crucially involved in the control of eating behaviour. This suggests the dlPFC as a target for the modulation of cognitive control processes over eating in BED. This modulation can be achieved by both, a cognitive training task and by noninvasive brain stimulation using tDCS. In studies with healthy normal-weight participants, (1) different cognitive training task enhance control over eating behaviour, (2) tDCS is an effective tool to ameliorate cognitive control processes, and (3) has beneficial effects on motivational aspects of eating behaviour, i.e. food craving. Based on this evidence, we will use a combination of a cognitive control task and tDCS to enhance cognitive control over eating in patients with BED. This is to the best of our knowledge one of the first studies to use tDCS as an intervention to enhance cognitive control over eating in patients with BED.

o Sample size: We will allocate 40 patients in the trial, i.e. 20 patients in each study arm.

o Recruitment: Patients are recruited by announcements, mails to the distributor list of the university hospital, existing databases of patients, and current patients of the university hospital. Patients are screened by a standardized checklist. In- and exclusion criteria are checked during the screening procedure and during the baseline diagnostic before randomisation.

o Standard Operating Procedures: For the recruitment, diagnostic and experimental sessions, Standard Operating Procedures are documented for the experimenter. This includes the order of clinical interviews, questionnaires and operating with the technical measurement instruments. The experimenters are regularly supervised. All adverse events will be listed and severe adverse events will be reported immediately to the PIs.

o Quality assurance plan: Randomized allocation to the stimulation condition (verum vs. sahm) and statistical analyses is done externally by the Institute of Clinical Epidemiology and Applied Biometry, University Tübingen, Germany (ICEAB). Objective technical measurement instruments are mostly used to record data.

o Data checks: Data is recorded mostly by objective technical measurement instruments, so no external monitoring is needed. We will spot check entered questionnaire data, in particular binge eating frequency in the past four weeks will be double checked as this is the primary outcome (PO).

o Source data verification: Data are spot checked by comparing the entries in the source data with the entries in the database. Each PO entry will be double checked. There are pre-defined criteria for entering data into the database.

* Data dictionary:

A data dictionary that contains detailed descriptions of each variable and how to be entered is available.

o Plan for missing data: Missing data and invalid data as well as the reasons will be recorded.

o Statistical analysis plan: A mixed model approach will be used to analyze the PO and secondary outcomes (SOs).

Recruitment & Eligibility

Status
COMPLETED
Sex
All
Target Recruitment
41
Inclusion Criteria
  • BED according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5)
  • Legal age
  • BMI above 20 kg/m2
Exclusion Criteria
  • Insufficient knowledge of German language
  • Current pregnancy or lactation period
  • Current or lifetime psychotic disorder, bipolar-I disorder, current substance dependence, suicidality
  • Past bariatric surgery
  • Severe physical disease which influence weight or eating behaviour (e.g. severe diabetes) or neurologic disease
  • Non-removable metal parts in the area of the head
  • Pacemaker
  • Neuroleptics and benzodiazepine
  • impaired vision, ametropia, eye diseases

Study & Design

Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Study Design
PARALLEL
Arm && Interventions
GroupInterventionDescription
Cognitive Control Training + Verum stimulationBehavioral training and verum stimulationThis arm consists of the cognitive control training (six sessions) combined with 2mA anodal tDCS over the right dlPFC (F4) during the training for 20 minutes.
Cognitive Control Training + Sham stimulationBehavioral training and sham stimulationThis arm consists of cognitive control training (six sessions) with sham-tDCS. 2 mA Sham-tDCS (40 seconds of tDCS) is applied to the right dlPFC (F4) before the trainings starts.
Primary Outcome Measures
NameTimeMethod
Binge eating frequencyassessed at baseline (T0) and at diagnostic post assessment four weeks after treatment (T8)

Change of the frequency of Binge eating episodes in the last 4 weeks according to the Eating Disorder Examination Interview (EDE) between baseline (T0) and diagnostic post assessment (T8). The EDE is a validated semi-structured clinical interview.

Secondary Outcome Measures
NameTimeMethod
Body Mass Index (BMI)at baseline (T0) and at diagnostic post assessment four weeks after treatment (T8)

computed by objectively assessed weight and height

Binge eating frequency follow-upassessed at baseline (T0) and at 3 months follow-up (T9)

Change of the frequency of Binge eating episodes in the last 4 weeks according to EDE between baseline (T0) and 3 months follow up (T9)

eating behaviour (TFEQ)at baseline (T0), at the post measurement of task performance within one week after the training (T7) and at diagnostic post assessment four weeks after treatment (T8)

assessed by the Three-factor Eating Questionnaire (TFEQ), Range 0-1 with higher scores indicating more pathological eating behaviour

Eating disorder pathology (EDE)assessed at baseline (T0), at diagnostic post assessment four weeks after treatment (T8) and 3 months follow-up (T9)

assessed by the Eating Disorder Examination (EDE), Range 0-6 with higer scores indication higer eating disorder pathology

food craving (FCQ-S)at baseline (T0), the six training sessions within two weeks (T1-T6) and the post measurement of task performance within one week after the training (T7)

assessed by the Food Craving Questionnaire, State Version (FCQ-S), Range 1-5 with higher scores indicating higher food craving

antisaccade taskassessed at baseline (T0), the six training sessions within two weeks (T1-T6) and the post measurement of task performance within one week after the training (T7)

antisaccade task error rate and latency assessed by eye tracking

impulsive behaviours per weekat baseline (T0), the six training sessions within two weeks (T1-T6), the post measurement of task performance within one week after the training (T7) and at diagnostic post assessment four weeks after treatment (T8)

assessed by a self-developed process analysis questionnaire, values \> 0 (unlimited frequency) with higher scores indicating more impulsive behaviours per week

impulsivity (UPPS)at baseline (T0) and at diagnostic post assessment four weeks after treatment (T8)

assessed by the "UPPS Impulsive Behavior Scale" (UPPS), Range 1-4 with higher scores indicating higher impulsivity

depressive symptoms (BDI II)at baseline (T0) and at diagnostic post assessment four weeks after treatment (T8)

assessed by the Becks Depression Inventory, Version 2 (BDI II), Range 0-3 with higher scores indicating higher depressive symptoms

acceptance and feasibilityfrom baseline (T0) throughout all measurement points until 3 months follow-up (T9)

drop-out rate throughout T0 to T9, percentage of included patients from the eligible patients at T0

evaluation of the training programmeassessed at the post measurement of task performance within one week after the training (T7)

self-developed questionnaire at T7 (Range 1-5 with higher cores indicating more satisfaction with the training programme)

Go/No-Go taskat baseline (T0) and at the post measurement of task performance within one week after the training (T7)

Go/No-Go task task error rate and latency

stimulus ratingat baseline (T0) and and the post measurement of task performance within one week after the training (T7)

one self-developed questionnaire including visual analogue scales (0-10 cm) concerning valence, appetite, wanting, liking of the presented stimuli

well-being (WHO-5)at baseline (T0), the post measurement of task performance within one week after the training (T7) and at diagnostic post assessment four weeks after treatment (T8)

assessed by the "WHO (Five) - Well-being Questionnaire" (WHO-5), Range 0-5 with higher scores indicating higher well-being

Trial Locations

Locations (1)

University Hospital Tübingen

🇩🇪

Tübingen, Germany

© Copyright 2025. All Rights Reserved by MedPath