Patricia Novo Navarroa,b,c, Ramón Landin-Romerod,e,f,g, Rocio Guardiola-Wanden-Bergheb,c, Ana Moreno-Alcázarc,d, Alicia Valiente-Gómezc,d, Walter Lupoh, Francisca Garcíai, Isabel Fernándezj, Víctor Pérezb,c
y Benedikt L. Amannc,d,∗

Abstract

Eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR) is a relatively new psychot- herapy that has gradually gained popularity for the treatment of post-traumatic stress disorder. In the present work, the standardised EMDR protocol is introduced, along with current hypot- heses of its mechanism of action, as well as a critical review of the available literature on its clinical effectiveness in adult post-traumatic stress disorder. A systematic review of the published literature was performed using PubMed and PsycINFO databases with the keywords «eye movement desensitization and reprocessing» and «post-traumatic stress disorder» and its abbreviations «EMDR» and «PTSD». Fifteen randomised controlled trials of good methodologi- cal quality were selected. These studies compared EMDR with unspecific interventions, waiting lists, or specific therapies. Overall, the results of these studies suggest that EMDR is a useful, evidence-based tool for the treatment of post-traumatic stress disorder, in line with recent recommendations from different international health organisations.

© 2016 SEP y SEPB. Published by Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.

Journal of EMDR Practice and Research

 Volume 13, Issue 4

• de Jongh, Ad
• Amann, Benedikt L.
• Hofmann, Arne
• Farrell, Derek
• Lee, Christopher W.

Journal of EMDR Practice and Research

Vol 13Issue 4

DOI: 10.1891/1933-3196.13.4.261

Abstract

Given that 2019 marks the 30th anniversary of eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR) therapy, the purpose of this article is to summarize the current empirical evidence in support of EMDR therapy as an effective treatment intervention for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Currently, there are more than 30 randomized controlled trials (RCT) demonstrating the effectiveness in patients with this debilitating mental health condition, thus providing a robust evidence base for EMDR therapy as a first-choice treatment for PTSD. Results from several meta-analyses further suggest that EMDR therapy is equally effective as its most important trauma-focused comparator, that is, trauma-focused cognitive behavioral therapy, albeit there are indications from some studies that EMDR therapy might be more efficient and cost-effective. There is emerging evidence showing that EMDR treatment of patients with psychiatric disorders, such as psychosis, in which PTSD is comorbid, is also safe, effective, and efficacious. In addition to future well-crafted RCTs in areas such as combat-related PTSD and psychiatric disorders with comorbid PTSD, RCTs with PTSD as the primary diagnosis remain pivotal in further demonstrating EMDR therapy as a robust treatment intervention.

Journal of EMDR Practice and Research Volume 13, Issue 4

• Tesarz, Jonas
• Wicking, Manon
• Bernardy, Kathrin
• Seidler, Günter H.

Journal of EMDR Practice and Research Vol 13 Issue 4 DOI:

10.1891/1933-3196.13.4.337

Abstract

Chronic pain is the most common global cause of functional and quality of life limitations. Although there are many effective therapies for the treatment of acute pain, chronic pain is often unsatisfactory. Against this background, there is currently an urgent need to develop innovative therapies that enable more efficient pain relief. Psychosocial factors play an important role in the development and persistence of chronic pain. Especially in patients with high levels of emotional stress, significant anxiety, or relevant psychological comorbidity, classical pain therapy approaches often fail. This is in line with the results of recent pain research, which has shown that dysfunctions in emotion processing have a significant influence on the persistence of pain symptoms. The recognition that pain can become chronic through maladaptive emotional processing forms the pathophysiological basis for the application of eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR) in the treatment of chronic pain. In this sense, EMDR can be used as an established method for desensitizing and processing of emotional distress from trauma therapy specifically for processing emotional stress in patients with chronic pain. Against this background, it is not surprising that the implementation of EMDR for patients with chronic pain is expanding. However, the increasing clinical use of EMDR in the treatment of chronic pain has also led to a reputation to test the efficacy of EMDR in pain management through randomized clinical trials. In addition to numerous case control studies, there are now also six randomized controlled clinical trials available that demonstrate the efficacy and safety of EMDR in the treatment of different pain conditions. However, in order to overcome several methodological limitations, large multicenter studies are needed to confirm the results.

Marianne Littel* , Marcel A. van den Hout and Iris M. Engelhard

Clinical Psychology, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands

Eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR) is an effective treatment for posttraumatic stress disorder. During this treatment, patients recall traumatic memo- ries while making horizontal eye movements (EM). Studies have shown that EM not only desensitize negative memories but also positive memories and imagined events. Substance use behavior and craving are maintained by maladaptive memory associa- tions and visual imagery. Preliminary findings have indicated that these mental images can be desensitized by EMDR techniques. We conducted two proof-of-principle studies to investigate whether EM can reduce the sensory richness of substance-related mental representations and accompanying craving levels. We investigated the effects of EM on (1) vividness of food-related mental imagery and food craving in dieting and non-dieting students and (2) vividness of recent smoking-related memories and cigarette craving in daily smokers. In both experiments, participants recalled the images while making EM or keeping eyes stationary. Image vividness and emotionality, image-specific craving and general craving were measured before and after the intervention. As a behavioral outcome measure, participants in study 1 were offered a snack choice at the end of the experiment. Results of both experiments showed that image vividness and crav- ing increased in the control condition but remained stable or decreased after the EM intervention. EM additionally reduced image emotionality (experiment 2) and affected behavior (experiment 1): participants in the EM condition were more inclined to choose healthy over unhealthy snack options. In conclusion, these data suggest that EM can be used to reduce intensity of substance-related imagery and craving. Although long-term effects are yet to be demonstrated, the current studies suggest that EM might be a useful technique in addiction treatment.

Front. Psychiatry 7:14. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2016.00014

Hwallip Bae • Changwoo Han • Daeho Kim

Ó Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Abstract

This case series introduces the desensitization of triggers and urge reprocessing (DeTUR), as a promising adjunctive therapy in addition to comprehensive treatment package for pathological gambling. This addiction protocol of eye movement desensiti- zation and reprocessing was delivered to four male inpatients admitted to a 10-week inpatient program for pathological gambling. The therapist gave three 60-min weekly sessions of the DeTUR using bilateral stimulation (horizontal eye movements or alterna- tive tactile stimuli) focusing on the hierarchy of triggering situations and the urge to initiate gambling behaviors. After treatment, self-reported gambling symptoms, depression, anx- iety, and impulsiveness were all improved, and all the participants reported satisfaction with the therapy. They were followed up for 6 months and all maintained their abstinence from gambling and their symptomatic improvements. Given the efficiency (i.e., brevity and efficacy) of the treatment, a controlled study to confirm the effects of the DeTUR on pathological gambling would be justified.

Open Access Original
Article DOI: 10.7759/cureus.3250

Received 08/27/2018
Review began 08/31/2018
Review ended 08/31/2018
Published 09/04/2018

Ali M. Khan 1 , Sabrina Dar 2 , Rizwan Ahmed 3 , Ramya Bachu 4 , Mahwish Adnan 5 , Vijaya Padma Kotapati 6

1. Psychiatry Resident, University of Texas Rio Grande Valley, Harlingen, Texas, USA 2. Psychiatry, Saint Elizabeth’s Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA 3. Psychiatry, Liaquat College, Karachi, PAK 4. Psychiatry, Northwell Zucker Hillside Hospital, New York, USA 5. Center for Addiction and Mental Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, CAN 6. Psychiatry, Manhattan Psychiatric Center, New York, USA

Corresponding author: Vijaya Padma Kotapati, padmakotapati89@gmail.com Disclosures can be found in Additional Information at the end of the article

Abstract

Background

Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is prevalent in children, adolescents and adults. It can occur alone or in comorbidity with other disorders. A broad range of psychotherapies such as cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) and eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR) have been developed for the treatment of PTSD.

Aim

Through quantitative meta-analysis, we aimed to compare the efficacy of CBT and EMDR: (i) relieving the post-traumatic symptoms, and (ii) alleviating anxiety and depression, in patients with PTSD.

Methods

We systematically searched EMBASE, Medline and Cochrane central register of controlled trials (CENTRAL) for articles published between 1999 and December 2017. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that compare CBT and EMDR in PTSD patients were included for quantitative meta- analysis using RevMan Version 5.

Results

Fourteen studies out of 714 were finally eligible. Meta-analysis of 11 studies (n = 547) showed that EMDR is better than CBT in reducing post-traumatic symptoms [SDM (95% CI) = -0.43 (- 0.73 – -0.12), p = 0.006]. However, meta-analysis of four studies (n = 186) at three-
month follow-up revealed no statistically significant difference [SDM (95% CI) = -0.21 (-0.50 – 0.08), p = 0.15]. The EMDR was also better than CBT in reducing anxiety [SDM (95% CI) = -0.71 (-1.21 – -0.21), p =0.005]. Unfortunately, there was no difference between CBT and EMDR in reducing depression [SDM (95% CI) = -0.21 (-0.44 – 0.02), p = 0.08].

Conclusion

The results of this meta-analysis suggested that EMDR is better than CBT in reducing post- traumatic symptoms and anxiety. However, there was no difference reported in reducing depression. Large population randomized trials with longer follow-up are recommended to build conclusive evidence.