Eye movement desensitisation and reprocessing therapy v. stabilisation as usual for refugees Randomised controlled trial

Authors
  • F.J.J. ter Heide
  • T.M. Mooren
  • R. van de Schoot
  • A. de Jongh ORCID logo
  • R.J. Kleber
Publication date 10-2016
Journal British Journal of Psychiatry
Volume | Issue number 209 | 4
Pages (from-to) 311-318
Organisations
  • Faculty of Dentistry (ACTA)
Abstract

Background: Eye movement desensitisation and reprocessing (EMDR) therapy is a first-line treatment for adults with post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Some clinicians argue that with refugees, directly targeting traumatic memories through EMDR may be harmful or ineffective.

Aims: To determine the safety and efficacy of EMDR in adult refugees with PTSD (trial registration: ISRCTN20310201).

Method: In total, 72 refugees referred for specialised treatment were randomly assigned to 12h of EMDR (3660 min planning/preparation followed by 6690 min desensitisation/reprocessing) or 12h (12660 min) of stabilisation. The Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale (CAPS) and Harvard Trauma Questionnaire (HTQ) were primary outcome measures.

Results: Intention-to-treat analyses found no differences in safety (one severe adverse event in the stabilisation condition only) or efficacy (effect sizes: CAPS -0.04 and HTQ 0.20) between the two conditions.

Conclusions: Directly targeting traumatic memories through 12 h of EMDR in refugee patients needing specialised treatment is safe, but is only of limited efficacy.

Document type Article
Language English
Related publication Authors' reply
Published at https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.bp.115.167775
Other links https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/84991740130
Permalink to this page
Back