British Journal of Psychiatry
Volume 209, Issue 4, 2016, Pages 311-318

Eye movement desensitisation and reprocessing therapy v. stabilisation as usual for refugees: Randomised controlled trial (Article) (Open Access)

Ter Heide F.J.J.* , Mooren T.M. , Van De Schoot R. , De Jongh A. , Kleber R.J.
  • a Foundation Centrum '45 - Partner, Arq Psychotrauma Expert Group, Nienoord 5, Diemen, 1112 XE, Netherlands
  • b Foundation Centrum '45 - Partner, Arq Psychotrauma Expert Group, Nienoord 5, Diemen, 1112 XE, Netherlands
  • c Department of Methods and Statistics, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands, Optentia Research Program, Faculty of Humanities, North-West University, Vanderbijlpark, South Africa
  • d Department of Behavioural Sciences, Academic Centre for Dentistry Amsterdam, University of Amsterdam, Vrije University, Amsterdam, Netherlands, School of Health Sciences, Salford University, Manchester, United Kingdom
  • e Foundation Centrum 45 - Partner, Arq Psychotrauma Expert Group, Diemen and Department of Clinical and Health Psychology, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands

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. © The Royal College of Psychiatrists 2016.

Author Keywords

[No Keywords available]

Index Keywords

depression refugee anxiety disorder intention to treat analysis human Refugees middle aged controlled study randomized controlled trial procedures quality of life evidence based practice patient safety Humans psychology male adverse outcome female Harvard Trauma Questionnaire questionnaire Outcome Assessment (Health Care) Article major clinical study adult posttraumatic stress disorder Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic anxiety assessment outcome assessment Clinician Administered PTSD Scale desensitization (psychology) Eye Movement Desensitization Reprocessing eye movement desensitization and reprocessing psychotropic agent treatment planning practice guideline therapy effect
Link
https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-84991740130&doi=10.1192%2fbjp.bp.115.167775&partnerID=40&md5=07da1ce578d857126733c3252283094a
DOI: 10.1192/bjp.bp.115.167775
ISSN: 00071250
Cited by: 20
Original Language: English