Our data showed that EDs patients experienced higher levels of stress, anxiety and depression (as evaluated through the DASS-21 and the PSS), and higher PTSD-related symptoms (Intrusion, Avoidance and Hyperarousal) than HC during the lockdown period. A major limitation of our finding resides in the fact that we did not have a pre-pandemic assessment of these symptoms in our samples, and therefore we cannot rule out the possibility that the differences detected between EDs patients and HC during the COVID-19 lockdown period were only reflecting those existing before the pandemic onset. However, our data warrant attention; since COVID-19 represented an unprecedented public health threat in the contemporary society, most individuals, regardless of their pre-epidemic health status, experienced higher levels of anxiety in response to widespread uncertainty [2, 19]. Here we showed that the difference in levels of stress, anxiety and depression between patients with EDs and HC remains significant in the lockdown period, underlying that patients with EDs should receive adequate psychological support. Moreover, our data fit perfectly with a recent review discussing the risk of EDs patients in the context of COVID-19 [4]. With respect to PTSD-related symptoms, our data are in line with previous studies showing that ED patients, given their elevated intolerance of uncertainty [20] and less effective coping strategies [21], are more vulnerable to develop stress, anxiety and PTSD-related symptoms than HC in different stressful situations [22].
Our longitudinal assessment showed that PTSD-related symptoms significantly improved with the end of the lockdown, while the high levels of anxiety, stress and depression persisted in patients with EDs. On one hand, again, we cannot reject the hypothesis that the anxious-depressive symptomatology was present even before the lockdown, representing a stable feature of our sample of patients and therefore was not directly linked to the pandemic onset. On the other hand, however, the persistence of psychiatric symptoms after similar stressful situations has been widely reported in the literature: for example, the psychological consequences of the SARS outbreak had long-lasting effects in the general population, in survivors from the pandemic disease, in healthcare workers and in specific sample of patients [23,24,25,26; for a review see 27].
With respect to PTSD-related symptoms, which improved at t1, some considerations about coping strategies should be done. It is reported that patients with EDs are more likely to use cognitive avoidance or cognitive rumination as a coping strategy, and are less likely to receive crisis support from a relative or friend [21], which is a crucial risk factor, given that psychosocial resources were found to have a strong association with PTSD-like symptomatology [28]. In our sample, at the IES-R, a reduction of Intrusion and Hyperarousal symptomatology, but not of Avoidance, emerged. We might hypothesize that the loss of routine and the isolation suffered during the lockdown have rendered ED patients more susceptible to experience traumatic symptoms.
Finally, we asked participants to evaluate whether their behaviour towards eating and their body image changed with the pandemic onset. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study longitudinally assessing the time course of these symptoms in a sample of patients with EDs during and after the COVID-19 lockdown. Patients with ED, compared to HC, reported to experience a heightened fear of losing control over eating and discomfort of seeing their own body, and to spend more time thinking about their body during the lockdown than before. These results are in line with previous studies suggesting that the COVID-19 lockdown might have worsened EDs symptoms [8, 10], and with the hypothesis advanced by Rogers and colleagues suggesting that the restricted possibility to perform physical activity and the change in one’s own eating and sleeping habits might have induced changes in body shape or weight, and might have worsened ED-specific anxiety concerns [6]. On the other hand, no differences between groups emerged at the variable Restrictive_Diet, suggesting that both EDs and HC groups did not perceive any change in their diet following the lockdown restrictions (i.e. EDs patients kept trying to control their calories intake as they did before the lockdown, while HC kept their normal eating habits). Here we made a step further showing that the levels of most of the concerns linked to EDs psychopathology lowered after the end of the lockdown, supporting the hypothesis that specific conditions occurring during the lockdown might directly affect specific ED symptoms.
Finally, together with reduced PTSD-like and EDs symptomatology, patients with EDs reported feeling significantly better with the easing of the lockdown. As Cooper and colleagues suggested [4], social distancing measures might be thought, for patients with EDs, as a potential short-term relief, given the decrease in social interactions (i.e. the decrease in showing in public one’s own body figure) [4, 13]; in their review, they highlighted the fact that, despite this short-term mitigation of interpersonal social triggers of EDs, the risk for EDs patients to experience a worsening of their symptomatology, in association with the COVID-19 outbreak, was high. Moreover, they suggested investigating the potential benefit of the end of the lockdown, which we did in the present study, showing first evidence that EDs patients’ psychological wellbeing actually improved with the end of the lockdown.
Our study has several limitations: (1) the lack of a pre-lockdown psychometric assessment of our samples; (2) we did not assess HC group at t1, and therefore we could not evaluate whether our results were specific of EDs patients or generalizable to the healthy population; (3) we arbitrarily selected five questions from the EDE-Q, which might have affected the psychometric validity of the questionnaire; (4) the limited sample size, which rendered unreliable any statistical analysis comparing patients with different EDs subtypes; (5) all data were self-reported; (6) we included only Caucasian participants, and therefore, we cannot generalize our results to other ethnicities; (7), we did not consider the socio-economical and employment status, which might have created a bias in our results.
In conclusion, our study showed that patients with EDs presented significantly higher levels of anxiety, depression, stress, PTSD- and ED-related symptoms than HC during the COVID-19 lockdown period in Italy. With the easing of the lockdown measures, PTSD- and ED-related symptoms improved in our sample of patients with EDs, but high levels of stress, anxiety and depression persisted. Our results should be taken into account when conceiving specific interventions for the EDs population, both in the context of a psychotherapy treatment tailored on the single patient and when designing large interventions of prevention.