This randomized controlled study investigated the effects of eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR) in the treatment of alcohol dependency. EMDR was applied to reprocess the addiction memory (AM) in chronically dependent patients. The AM includes memories of preparatory behavior, drug effects (drug use), and loss of control (Wolffgramm, 2002). It is understood to involve extensive brain circuitry, drive part of conscious and unconscious craving, change environmental response at an organic level, and modify circuits that link to feelings of satisfaction, future planning, and hope. Thirty-four patients with chronic alcohol dependency were randomly assigned to one of two treatment conditions: treatment as usual (TAU) or TAU plus two sessions of EMDR (TAU+EMDR). The craving for alcohol was measured by the Obsessive–Compulsive Drinking Scale (OCDS) pre-, post-, and 1 month after treatment. The TAU+EMDR group showed a significant reduction in craving posttreatment and 1 month after treatment, whereas TAU did not. Results indicate that EMDR might be a useful approach for the treatment of addiction memory and associated symptoms of craving.
Background: Treatment of recurrent depressive disorders is currently only moderately successful. Increasing evidence suggests a significant relationship between adverse childhood experiences and recurrent depressive disorders, suggesting that trauma-based interventions could be useful for these patients.Objectives: To investigate the efficacy of Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing therapy (EMDR) in addition to antidepressant medication (ADM) in treating recurrent depression.Design: A non-inferiority, single-blind, randomized clinical controlled trial comparing EMDR or CBT as adjunctive treatments to ADM. Randomization was carried out by a central computer system. Allocation was carried out by a study coordinator in each center.Setting: Two psychiatric services, one in Italy and one in Spain.Participants: Eighty-two patients were randomized with a 1:1 ratio to the EMDR group (n = 40) or CBT group (n = 42). Sixty-six patients, 31 in the EMDR group and 35 in the CBT group, were included in the completers analysis. Intervention: 15 ± 3 individual sessions of EMDR or CBT, both in addition to ADM. Participants were followed up at 6-months.Main outcome measure: Rate of depressive symptoms remission in both groups, as measured by a BDI-II score <13.Results: Sixty-six patients were analyzed as completers (31 EMDR vs. 35 CBT). No significant difference between the two groups was found either at the end of the interventions (71% EMDR vs. 48.7% CBT) or at the 6-month follow-up (54.8% EMDR vs. 42.9% CBT). A RM-ANOVA on BDI-II scores showed similar reductions over time in both groups [F(6,59) = 22.501, p < 0.001] and a significant interaction effect between time and group [F(6,59) = 3.357, p = 0.006], with lower BDI-II scores in the EMDR group at T1 [mean difference = –7.309 (95% CI [–12.811, –1.806]), p = 0.010]. The RM-ANOVA on secondary outcome measures showed similar improvement over time in both groups [F(14,51) = 8.202, p < 0.001], with no significant differences between groups [F(614,51) = 0.642, p = 0.817].Conclusion: Although these results can be considered preliminary only, this study suggests that EMDR could be a viable and effective treatment for reducing depressive symptoms and improving the quality of life of patients with recurrent depression. Trial registration: ISRCTN09958202.
Eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR) is a well-established treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder. Recent research suggested that it may be effective in treating depressive disorders as well. The present study is part of a multicenter randomized-controlled trial, the EDEN study, in which a homogenous group of 30 patients was treated to test whether EMDR plus treatment as usual (TAU) would achieve superior results compared to TAU only in a psychosomatic-psychotherapeutic inpatient treatment setting. Both groups were assessed by the Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II) and the Global Severity Index and depression subscale of the Symptom Checklist 90-Revised. The EMDR + TAU group improved significantly better than the TAU group on the BDI-II and Global Severity Index, while a marginally significant difference favoring the EMDR + TAU group over the TAU group was found on the depression subscale. In the EMDR + TAU group, seven out of 14 patients improved below nine points on the BDI-II, which is considered to be a full remission, while four out of 16 in the TAU group did so. These findings confirm earlier suggestions that EMDR therapy may provide additional benefit in the treatment of depression. The present study strengthens the previous literature on EMDR therapy in the treatment of depression due to the randomized-controlled design of the EDEN study.
BackgroundDepression is a severe mental disorder that challenges mental health systems worldwide as the success rates of all established treatments are limited. Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR) therapy is a scientifically acknowledged psychotherapeutic treatment for PTSD. Given the recent research indicating that trauma and other adverse life experiences can be the basis of depression, the aim of this study was to determine the effectiveness of EMDR therapy with this disorder.MethodIn this study, we recruited a group of 16 patients with depressive episodes in an inpatient setting. These 16 patients were treated with EMDR therapy by reprocessing of memories related to stressful life events in addition to treatment as usual (TAU). They were compared to a group of 16 controls matched regarding diagnosis, degree of depression, sex, age and time of admission to hospital, which were receiving TAU only.ResultsSixty-eight percent of the patients in the EMDR group showed full remission at end of treatment. The EMDR group showed a greater reduction in depressive symptoms as measured by the SCL-90-R depression subscale. This difference was significant even when adjusted for duration of treatment. In a follow-up period of more than 1 year the EMDR group reported less problems related to depression and less relapses than the control group.ConclusionsEMDR therapy shows promise as an effective treatment for depressive disorders. Larger controlled studies are necessary to replicate our findings.
Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR) therapy has been widely recognized as an efficacious treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). In the last years more insight has been gained regarding the efficacy of EMDR therapy in a broad field of mental disorders beyond PTSD. The cornerstone of EMDR therapy is its unique model of pathogenesis and change: the adaptive information processing (AIP) model. The AIP model developed by F. Shapiro has found support and differentiation in recent studies on the importance of memories in the pathogenesis of a range of mental disorders beside PTSD. However, theoretical publications or research on the application of the AIP model are still rare. The increasing acceptance of ideas that relate the origin of many mental disorders to the formation and consolidation of implicit dysfunctional memory lead to formation of the theory of pathogenic memories. Within the theory of pathogenic memories these implicit dysfunctional memories are considered to form basis of a variety of mental disorders. The theory of pathogenic memories seems compatible to the AIP model of EMDR therapy, which offers strategies to effectively access and transmute these memories leading to amelioration or resolution of symptoms. Merging the AIP model with the theory of pathogenic memories may initiate research. In consequence, patients suffering from such memory-based disorders may be earlier diagnosed and treated more effectively.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.