Background: Traumatic Events (TEs) are often seen as risk factors not only for the development of eating disorders (EDs) but also for their impact on the severity of clinical presentation and psychiatric comorbidities. Objective: This study aimed to assess the prevalence and time of occurrence of TEs in the two subtypes of anorexia nervosa (AN; restricting [RAN] and binge-purging [BPAN]) and to investigate differences in TEs (number, type, frequency) as well as clusters of post-traumatic symptoms and emotional dysregulation between the two groups. Method: Seventy-seven hospitalized women were recruited and divided into two subgroups according to their AN subtype. Participants completed the following self-reported measures: Eating Disorder Inventory-2 (EDI-2), Life Events Checklist (LEC), Impact of Events Scale-Revised (IES-R) and the Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale (DERS). Results: A higher occurrence of TEs was found in patients with BPAN than in those with RAN. In particular, there were significantly more women in the BPAN group than in the RAN group who had been sexually assaulted. Exposure to TEs happened before the onset of illness in most patients, regardless of the AN subtype. Finally, the BPAN group had significantly higher scores in terms of post-traumatic symptoms and emotional dysregulation than RAN patients. Conclusions: Patients with BPAN showed a higher occurrence of TEs, post-traumatic symptom clusters, and emotional dysregulation than those with RAN. These findings are of interest as treatments could benefit from trauma-informed interventions for those affected by AN, and particularly for those with the binge-purging subtype.

Background: the role of self-conscious emotions (SCE) such as shame and guilt in eating disorders (ED) has been systematically studied only in recent years, but it is still debated. This study aims to investigate the role of SCE in anorexia nervosa (AN), evaluating the role of self-consciousness. Methods: fifty-five individuals with AN and seventy-four healthy controls (HC) were enrolled and completed a battery of tests evaluating the proneness to feel shame and guilt, as well as comparing self-consciousness, eating, and general psychopathology. Results: individuals with AN showed a higher proneness to shame. Shame was correlated with body dissatisfaction and drive for thinness, which are core symptoms in AN, after controlling for scores of depression and anxiety. Proneness to guilt seemed to be less correlated with eating and body symptomatology, but it appeared to have a negative correlation with binge-purging symptoms. Furthermore, proneness to shame was independent of guilt or self-consciousness and the two groups did not differ regarding public and private self-consciousness. Conclusions: shame is an important and independent factor in AN. Future research may offer progress in the development of shame-focused therapies.

Background and Objectives: Anorexia nervosa (AN) is a complex disorder whose etiopathogenesis involves both biological and environmental factors. The aims of the present study were to retrospectively analyze risk factors in young patients with AN and to assess differences in clinical and eating-related symptoms between patients with and without a diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and with or without a history of acknowledged risk factors. Materials and Methods: Sixty-four patients with AN (<25 years old) were recruited and completed an anamnestic evaluation and the following self-report measures: Eating Disorder Examination Questionnaire (EDE-Q), Childhood Trauma Questionnaire (CTQ), State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI-Y), Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), Life Events Checklist (LEC), and Dissociative Experience Scale (DES). The PTSD diagnosis was assigned according to the Structured Clinical Interview for the DSM-5 (SCID-5). Results: The most frequent risk factors were those associated with relational traumatic events and familiarity for psychiatric disorders. Higher severity of body-related symptoms (i.e., those symptoms impacting on body image and perception and leading to body concerns) emerged in patients with PTSD, versus patients without PTSD diagnosis; however, after controlling for dissociative symptoms, only differences in BMI remained significant. Concerning other risk factors, those with a history of childhood trauma were more depressed than patients without such history and those with familiarity with eating disorders reported more AN-related hospitalizations in the past than those individuals without familiarity. Conclusion: These results suggest the importance of investigating the presence of risk factors and PTSD diagnosis in patients with AN, and to treat post-traumatic symptoms in young patients in order to decrease the risk of developing severe forms of AN. Moreover, a particular focus on those patients with a family member affected by an eating disorder could be of clinical utility.

The validity of body mass index (BMI) specifiers for anorexia nervosa (AN) has been questioned, but their applicability to inpatients with extremely low BMIs and their prognostic validity are currently unknown. Therefore, we designed this study: (a) to test current BMI specifiers in severe inpatients; (b) to explore a “very extreme” specifier (VE-AN; BMI ≤ 13.5); and (c) to verify inpatients’ hospitalization outcome according to BMI severity. We enrolled 168 inpatients with AN completing the following: Eating disorder Examination-Questionnaire, Eating Disorder Inventory-2, State-Trait Anxiety Inventory, Beck Depression Inventory, Body Shape Questionnaire, and EQ-5D-VAS. According to the current BMI classification, those with a BMI < 15 versus those with non-extreme AN (NE-AN, BMI ≥ 15) differed on all measures but the quality of life with those with NE-AN reporting more impaired scores on all measures. Adopting an exploratory classification comparing VE-AN, extreme AN (E-AN, BMI = 13.6–14.99), and NE-AN, no differences emerged between VE-AN and E-AN, while those with NE-AN reported significantly more impaired scores on all variables while the quality of life again did not differ across groups. Hospitalization outcome improved for all groups, independently of BMI. Groups differed concerning the length of stay that mirrored BMI severity and impacted also hospitalization outcomes. Taken together, our data support the lack of validity of current BMI specifiers in AN, even in the acute setting. Moreover, the exploratory subgroup of patients with BMI ≤ 13.5 did not delineate a clinically different group.

Purpose: This study was set up to investigate the reliability, factorial, concurrent, and criterion validity of the Italian version of the 34-item Body Shape Questionnaire (BSQ) and its shorter versions. Methods: The study included 231 patients diagnosed with an eating disorder and 58 putatively healthy people (comparison sample). The Italian BSQ-34 was administered to participants together with the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale and the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale. Information on body mass index, caloric intake at baseline, and the number of episodes of self-vomiting per week was also acquired. Results: Cronbach’s alpha of BSQ-34 was 0.971 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.965–0.976) in patients and 0.960 (0.944–0.974) in controls. Test–retest stability in patients (n = 69), measured with intraclass correlation coefficient, was 0.987 (0.983–0.991). Confirmatory factor analysis of the single-factor model yielded acceptable fit for all versions of the BSQ. On all BSQ versions, patients scored higher than controls with a large effect size when calculated as Cliff’s delta. BMI and mean caloric intake at baseline had a stronger association with BSQ-34 than levels of anxiety and depression. The analysis with the receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve showed that the BSQ-34 distinguished patients with an eating disorder from controls with good accuracy (Area Under the Curve = 86.5; 95% CI 82.2–90.7). Conclusion: The Italian version of the BSQ possesses good psychometric properties, in both the long and the shortened versions, and it can be applied to measure body dissatisfaction for both clinical and research purposes. Level of evidence: Level III, Evidence obtained from well-designed cohort or case–control analytic studies.