Evaluation of a psychoeducational group program for parents of adolescents with anorexia nervosa: pre-post associations with psychological distress.

INTRODUCTION: Parents play a pivotal role in a child's or adolescent's recovery from anorexia nervosa (AN). However, they often experience substantial psychological distress that may limit their ability to support treatment effectively. Structured psychoeducation may help parents understand the illness and treatment process and may support treatment engagement in young people with AN. This uncontrolled pre-post evaluation examined parental psychological distress, self-perceived knowledge and competence, and post-intervention satisfaction with a brief psychoeducational group program. METHODS: Fifty-five parents were screened and 53 consented to participate. Thirty-nine parents of children and adolescents with typical or atypical AN returned complete pre-post data and were included in the analyses. The program consisted of four-session psychoeducational program (90-minute weekly sessions) covering etiology, treatment concepts, nutritional principles, and relapse prevention. Psychological distress was assessed before and after the program using the Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI). Program satisfaction and perceived benefit were evaluated at program completion. RESULTS: Participants showed high psychological distress at baseline, with significantly lower distress scores after the intervention period. Program satisfaction and attendance were high, with 87% completing all sessions. Parents reported feeling better informed about anorexia nervosa and its treatment, reported high perceived competence in supporting their child and described the material as accessible and understandable. CONCLUSION: In this single-center uncontrolled pre-post evaluation, participation in guideline-based psychoeducation was associated with lower parental psychological distress at post-intervention and high acceptability. Because of the uncontrolled design and the absence of patient-level outcomes, these findings should be interpreted as preliminary associations rather than evidence of a causal intervention effect.