Department of Psychological Medicine, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, UK
Michaela Flynn
Department of Psychological Medicine, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, UK
Amelia Austin
Department of Psychological Medicine, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, UK
Katie Lang
Department of Psychological Medicine, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, UK
Karina L. Allen
Department of Psychological Medicine, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, UK; and Eating Disorder Outpatient Service, South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, UK
Ranjeet Bassi
Eating Disorder Outpatient Service, South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, UK
Gabrielle Brady
Vincent Square Eating Disorder Service, Central and North West London NHS Foundation Trust, UK
Amy Brown
Eating Disorder Outpatient Service, South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, UK
Frances Connan
Vincent Square Eating Disorder Service, Central and North West London NHS Foundation Trust, UK
Mary Franklin-Smith
Eating Disorder Service, Leeds and York Partnership NHS Foundation Trust, UK
Danielle Glennon
Eating Disorder Outpatient Service, South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, UK
Nina Grant
Eating Disorder Outpatient Service, South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, UK
William Rhys Jones
Eating Disorder Service, Leeds and York Partnership NHS Foundation Trust, UK
Kuda Kali
Vincent Square Eating Disorder Service, Central and North West London NHS Foundation Trust, UK
Antonia Koskina
Eating Disorder Outpatient Service, South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, UK
Kate Mahony
Eating Disorder Service, North East London NHS Foundation Trust, UK
Victoria A. Mountford
Department of Psychological Medicine, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, UK; Eating Disorder Outpatient Service, South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, UK; and Maudsley Health Eating Disorder Service, Maudsley Health, United Arab Emirates
Nicole Nunes
Vincent Square Eating Disorder Service, Central and North West London NHS Foundation Trust, UK
Monique Schelhase
Eating Disorder Service, Leeds and York Partnership NHS Foundation Trust, UK
Lucy Serpell
Eating Disorder Service, North East London NHS Foundation Trust, UK; and Division of Psychology and Language Sciences, University College London, UK
Ulrike Schmidt
Department of Psychological Medicine, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, UK; and Eating Disorder Outpatient Service, South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, UK
Background The First Episode Rapid Early Intervention for Eating Disorders (FREED) service model is associated with significant reductions in wait times and improved clinical outcomes for emerging adults with recent-onset eating disorders. An understanding of how FREED is implemented is a necessary precondition to enable an attribution of these findings to key components of the model, namely the wait-time targets and care package. Aims This study evaluated fidelity to the FREED service model during the multicentre FREED-Up study. Method Participants were 259 emerging adults (aged 16–25 years) with an eating disorder of <3 years duration, offered treatment through the FREED care pathway. Patient journey records documented patient care from screening to end of treatment. Adherence to wait-time targets (engagement call within 48 h, assessment within 2 weeks, treatment within 4 weeks) and care package, and differences in adherence across diagnosis and treatment group were examined. Results There were significant increases (16–40%) in adherence to the wait-time targets following the introduction of FREED, irrespective of diagnosis. Receiving FREED under optimal conditions also increased adherence to the targets. Care package use differed by component and diagnosis. The most used care package activities were psychoeducation and dietary change. Attention to transitions was less well used. Conclusions This study provides an indication of adherence levels to key components of the FREED model. These adherence rates can tentatively be considered as clinically meaningful thresholds. Results highlight aspects of the model and its implementation that warrant future examination.