Perfectionism in Anorexia Nervosa: A 624-Month Follow-Up Study by Standar-Pinnock - Article Example

In the research, a retrospective study examining perfectionism at admission, discharge, and in the period between 6–24-month follow-up after in-patient treatment forms the basis of comparing the relationship between perfectionism and the clinical status of Anorexia Nervosa patients. The sample studied consisted of 71 women and 2 men with an average age of 27.2 years and mean illness duration of 62.4 months at the time of admission. The samples mean BMI was 14.8kg/m.The study variables included the following:EDI Perfectionism score for patients (independent) -Pretreatment EDI Perfectionism scores, Post-treatment EDI Perfectionism scores, and Follow-up EDI Perfectionism scoresMulti-dimensional perfectionism (Independent) - Total Perfectionism, Concern over Mistakes, Personal Standards, Parental Expectations, Parental Criticism, Doubting of Action.

Outcome categories (dependent) - Good outcome, Poor outcome, Healthy control.Tested hypotheses 1. EDI perfectionism scores differ across patients 2. EDI scores are the difference between good and bad outcomes and between completers and non-completers 3. There are significant changes in EDI Perfectionism between the good and poor outcome groups at admission, discharge, and follow-up4. Outcome recorded differs based on the recorded MDI perfection Statistical procedures One sample t-tests were used to compare EDI Perfectionism scores among participants while an independent sample t-test was used to compare EDI scores between the good and poor outcome groups and between treatment completers and non-completers.

On the other hand, analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used in the examination of changes in EDI perfectionism between good and poor outcome groups at admission, discharge, and follow-up. MPS total perfectionism comparisons were analyzed using one-way ANOVA while posthoc comparisons were conducted using Dunnett’s C test. Additionally, comparisons of the MPS subscales between the groups were made using a one-way multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA). Overall findingsThe mean Perfectionism score for patients at pre-treatment was found to be significantly higher compared to that of published control female college comparison sample, t(54) = 4.

89, p < .001 while the mean score at post-treatment for weight-restored participants was not significantly different from healthy control mean score, t (26) = 1.44, p <.16 while at follow-up, the good outcome group was found to have a significantly lower perfectionism score as compared to poor outcome group, t (45) = 2.56, p < .01 (Standar-Pinnock, Woodside, Carter, Olmsted, & Kaplan, 2002). The good outcome group showed no significant difference from the healthy controls, t (20) = 0.

43, p <.68. On the contrary, the poor outcome group was found to have significantly higher scores compared to healthy controls, t (27) = 3.43, p < .002 (Standar-Pinnock, Woodside, Carter, Olmsted, & Kaplan, 2002). Of the participants, 23 completed the EDI at all three times. At follow-up, 13 had a good outcome and 10 poor outcomes. Their scores at pre-treatment, post-treatment, and follow-up were compared to examine GroupTime interactions which were found to approach statistical significance, F (2, 40) = 2.

84, p< .07 with Post-hoc comparisons revealing that for good outcome group only, decrease in perfectionism from pretreatment to post-treatment to follow-up approached significance, F (2, 11) = 3.63, p < .06 (Standar-Pinnock, Woodside, Carter, Olmsted, & Kaplan, 2002). A further comparison between completers and non-completers revealed that treatment completers were more likely to have a good outcome at follow-up.