EMDR v. other psychological therapies for PTSD: a systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: This systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis (IPDMA) examined the overall effectiveness of eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR) in reducing posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms, achieving response and remission, and reducing treatment dropout among adults with PTSD compared to other psychological treatments. Additionally, we examined available participant-level moderators of the efficacy of EMDR. METHODS: This study included randomized controlled trials. Eligible studies were identified by a systematic search in PubMed, Embase, PsyclNFO, PTSDpubs, and CENTRAL. The target population was adults with above-threshold baseline PTSD symptoms. Trials were eligible if at least 70% of study participants had been diagnosed with PTSD using a structured clinical interview. Primary outcomes included PTSD symptom severity, treatment response, and PTSD remission. Treatment dropout was a secondary outcome. The systematic search retrieved 15 eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs); 8 of these 15 were able to be included in this IPDMA (346 patients). Comparator treatments included relaxation therapy, emotional freedom technique, trauma-focused cognitive behavioral psychotherapies, and REM-desensitization. RESULTS: One-stage IPDMA found no significant difference between EMDR and other psychological treatments in reducing PTSD symptom severity (ß = -0.24), achieving response (ß = 0.86), attaining remission (ß = 1.05), or reducing treatment dropout rates (ß = -0.25). Moderator analyses found unemployed participants receiving EMDR had higher PTSD symptom severity at the post-test, and males were more likely to drop out of EMDR treatment than females. CONCLUSION: The current study found no significant difference between EMDR and other psychological treatments. We found some indication of the moderating effects of gender and employment status.

Trauma-focused treatments for depression. A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Trauma-focused treatments (TFTs) have demonstrated efficacy at decreasing depressive symptoms in individuals with PTSD. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the effectiveness of TFTs for individuals with depression as their primary concern. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted for RCTs published before October 2019 in Cochrane CENTRAL, Pubmed, EMBASE, PsycInfo, and additional sources. Trials examining the impact of TFTs on participants with depression were included. Trials focusing on individuals with PTSD or another mental health condition were excluded. The primary outcome was the effect size for depression diagnosis or depressive symptoms. Heterogeneity, study quality, and publication bias were also explored. RESULTS: Eleven RCTs were included (n = 567) with ten of these using EMDR as the TFT and one using imagery rescripting. Analysis suggested these TFTs were effective in reducing depressive symptoms post-treatment with a large effect size [d = 1.17 (95% CI: 0.58~ 1.75)]. Removal of an outlier saw the effect size remain large [d = 0.83 (95% CI: 0.48~ 1.17)], while the heterogeneity decreased (I2 = 66%). Analysis of the 10 studies that used EMDR also showed a large effect [d = 1.30 (95% CI: 0.67~1.91)]. EMDR was superior to non trauma-focused CBT [d = 0.66 (95% CI: 0.31~1.02)] and analysis of EMDR and imagery rescripting studies suggest superiority over inactive control conditions [d = 1.19 (95% CI: 0.53~ 1.86)]. Analysis of follow-up data also supported the use of EMDR with this population [d = 0.71 (95% CI: 1.04~0.38)]. No publication bias was identified. CONCLUSIONS: Current evidence suggests that EMDR can be an effective treatment for depression. There were insufficient RCTs on other trauma-focused interventions to conclude whether TFTs in general were effective for treating depression. Larger studies with robust methodology using EMDR and other trauma-focused interventions are needed to build on these findings.

A randomized controlled trial examining the impact of individual trauma-focused therapy for individuals receiving group treatment for depression.

OBJECTIVES: Adverse life events are associated with increased likelihood of depression and poorer prognosis. Trauma-focused treatments (TFT) appear to be effective in decreasing comorbid depressive symptoms. Accordingly, the aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a TFT on the memories of aversive events for individuals with a primary diagnosis of depression. METHODS: A randomized controlled trial was conducted with 49 participants recruited from a 10-day outpatient group programme. All participants showed symptoms of depression with a subgroup (80%) meeting the DSM-5 criteria for a major depressive episode. Participants received treatment as usual (TAU); three additional individual trauma-focused sessions; or three additional individual assertiveness training sessions. Participants were assessed with regards to depression diagnosis and related symptoms. RESULTS: For participants with a major depressive episode, the addition of trauma-focused sessions significantly increased the likelihood of remission when compared to TAU, or additional assertiveness training. While no significant treatment difference was noted in depressive symptom change post-treatment, six weeks after treatment those who received an adjunct treatment were more likely to maintain treatment gains than those who received TAU. Furthermore, at 12-week follow-up, participants who received a TFT reported significantly fewer depressive symptoms than those who received assertiveness training. CONCLUSIONS: While differences in outcomes were minimal immediately post-treatment, differences among treatment groups increased over time. Thus, as few as three additional TFT sessions may impact positively on symptom change for people completing a group programme for the treatment of depression. PRACTITIONER POINTS: Depression is the greatest cause of disability worldwide. Adverse experiences are linked with an increased likelihood of depression, more severe symptoms and poor treatment outcomes following evidence-based interventions. As few as three trauma-focused sessions can improve treatment outcomes in terms of depression diagnosis and related symptoms for individuals receiving group cognitive behavioural therapy.

The efficacy of acupoint stimulation in the treatment of psychological distress: A meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Emotional Freedom Techniques (EFT) is a type of therapy involving the stimulation of acupuncture points while using a spoken affirmation to target a psychological issue. While some studies cite data indicating EFT is highly efficacious, findings in other studies are unconvincing. The aim of this meta-analysis was to examine the effect of EFT, particular acupoint stimulation, in the treatment of psychological distress. METHOD: A systematic review of the literature identified 18 randomised control trials published in peer reviewed journals involving a total of 921 participants. RESULTS: A moderate effect size (Hedge's g = -0.66: 95% CI: -0.99 to -0.33) and significantly high heterogeneity (I(2) = 80.78) across studies was found using a random effects model indicating that EFT, even after removing outliers (decreases in I(2) = 72.32 and Hedge's g = -0.51:95% CI:-0.78 to -0.23), appears to produce an effect. The analysis involved 12 studies comparing EFT with waitlist controls, 5 with adjuncts and only 1 comparison with an alternate treatment. Meta-regression and subgroup analyses were conducted to examine the effect of moderators on effect size of symptom change following EFT. CONCLUSIONS: Due to methodological shortcomings, it was not possible to determine if the effect is due to acupoint stimulation or simply due to treatment elements common with other therapies.

A meta-analysis of the contribution of eye movements in processing emotional memories.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Eye Movement Desensitisation and Reprocessing (EMDR) is now considered evidence based practice in the treatment of trauma symptoms. Yet in a previous meta-analysis, no significant effect was found for the eye movement component. However methodological issues with this study may have resulted in a type II error. The aim of this meta-analysis was to examine current published studies to test whether eye movements significantly affect the processing of distressing memories. METHOD: A systematic review of the literature revealed two groups of studies. The first group comprised 15 clinical trials and compared the effects of EMDR therapy with eye movements to those of EMDR without the eye movements. The second group comprised 11 laboratory trials that investigated the effects of eye movements while thinking of a distressing memory versus the same procedure without the eye movements in a non-therapy context. The total number of participants was 849. RESULTS: The effect size for the additive effect of eye movements in EMDR treatment studies was moderate and significant (Cohen's d = 0.41). For the second group of laboratory studies the effect size was large and significant (d = 0.74). The strongest effect size difference was for vividness measures in the non-therapy studies (d = 0.91). The data indicated that treatment fidelity acted as a moderator variable on the effect of eye movements in the therapy studies. CONCLUSIONS: Results were discussed in terms of current theories that suggest the processes involved in EMDR are different from other exposure based therapies.