Key result
Asymptomatic generalized joint hypermobility was associated with significantly higher median EAT-40 scores compared to students without hypermobility (9 vs. 6, p = .002).
Why the study?
Does generalized joint hypermobility impact eating behavior in physical therapy and rehabilitation students?
Case-Control (n=97)
Does generalized joint hypermobility impact eating behavior in physical therapy and rehabilitation students?
Generalized joint hypermobility is associated with higher scores on eating disorder assessments in physical therapy students.
Should not yet change screening in students; leaves open whether hypermobility influences eating pathology more broadly.
Objective To investigate the impact of generalized joint hypermobility (GJH) on eating behavior.Participants Physical therapy and rehabilitation students.Methods The Beighton evaluation (a cutoff of 5/9) for defining GJH. The Eating Attitudes Test (EAT-40) was used for eating disorders. Smoking habits and alcohol use were also questioned.Results Compared with 51 non-GJH students (mean age 20.5 years, 73% female), 46 students with asymptomatic GJH (20.6 years, 89% female) were more likely to have greater median EAT-40 scores (9 vs. 6, p = .002). There was no statistically significant difference between the groups in terms of the susceptibility to eating behavior disorders (6.5% vs. 2.0%), smoking habits (6.5% vs. 9.8%), and alcohol use (15.2% vs. 11.8%) (p > .05). Positive correlation (r = .221, p = .029) and positive effect (R = 0.221, R2 = 0.049; p < .05) between Beighton scores and EAT-40 scores were found.Conclusion The more joint hypermobility the greater the risk for eating disorders.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Can et al. (2022) conducted a case-control in Generalized joint hypermobility (n=97). Generalized joint hypermobility (GJH) vs. Non-GJH was evaluated on Median EAT-40 scores (p=.002). Asymptomatic generalized joint hypermobility was associated with significantly higher median EAT-40 scores compared to students without hypermobility (9 vs. 6, p = .002).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: