RTI uses cookies to offer you the best experience online. By clicking “accept” on this website, you opt in and you agree to the use of cookies. If you would like to know more about how RTI uses cookies and how to manage them please view our Privacy Policy here. You can “opt out” or change your mind by visiting: http://optout.aboutads.info/. Click “accept” to agree.
Use and value of the 7-item binge eating disorder screener in clinical practice
Herman, B. K., Deal, L. S., Kando, J. C., DiBenedetti, D. B., Nelson, L., Fehnel, S. E., & Brown, T. M. (2017). Use and value of the 7-item binge eating disorder screener in clinical practice. The Primary Care Companion For CNS Disorders, 19(3). https://doi.org/10.4088/PCC.16m02075
Objective: To evaluate physician knowledge of and attitudes about binge-eating disorder (BED) and the value and ease-of-use of the 7-item Binge Eating Disorder Screener (BEDS-7) in clinical practice.
Methods: Two internet surveys (wave 1: April 15-May 6, 2015; wave 2: August 19-25, 2015) were administered to primary care physicians serving adults (PCPs-adults) and psychiatrists. Wave 1 invitees were US-based physicians spending ≥ 50% of their time in direct patient care and reporting "no" to "some to average" experience with eating-disorder patients. Respondents completing wave 1 qualified for wave 2.
Results: Among the 1,047 physicians who responded, 313 did not meet at least 1 of the screening criteria, including 3.15% of respondents who spent < 50% of their time in direct patient care. Overall, 122 PCPs-adults and 123 psychiatrists completed both waves. Physician groups spent similar mean ± SD amounts of time providing direct patient care (PCPs-adults: 94.66% ± 8.4%, psychiatrists: 91.15% ± 12.2%). Based on composite scores, BED knowledge increased from wave 1 to wave 2 in PCPs-adults (P < .001) and psychiatrists (P < .05). Composite scores pertaining to knowledge of and comfort with diagnosing and treating BED were lower for PCPs-adults than psychiatrists in both waves (all P < .001). Based on wave 2 responses, the BEDS-7 was used by 32.0% of PCPs-adults and 26.8% of psychiatrists. All BEDS-7 users (100%) indicated the screener was "very" or "somewhat" valuable, and nearly all users (psychiatrists: 100%, PCPs-adults: 97.4%) reported it was "very" or "reasonably" easy to use. BEDS-7 users reported that important uses of the screener included assisting clinicians in identifying BED patients and encouraging/initiating doctor-patient discussions about BED.
Conclusions: These results support the utility of the BEDS-7 in clinical practice, with BEDS-7 users reporting that it is a highly valued and easy-to-use screener. Furthermore, both PCPs-adults and psychiatrists acknowledged the importance of being knowledgeable about BED.
