Efficacy of EMDR in Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials.
[EN]In recent years, eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR) has spread, in both the number of publications and professionals who use this technique in the clinical setting. The objective of this meta-analysis was to verify the efficacy of EMDR in treatment of post-traumatic stress diso...
| Autores: | , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2023 |
| País: | España |
| Institución: | Universidad de Salamanca (USAL) |
| Repositorio: | GREDOS. Repositorio Institucional de la Universidad de Salamanca |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:gredos.usal.es:10366/155037 |
| Acceso en línea: | http://hdl.handle.net/10366/155037 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | EMDR PTSD Meta-analysis Efficacy Systematic review Anxiety Disorders Anxiety Eye Movement Desensitization Reprocessing Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic Treatment Outcome Humans resultado del tratamiento humanos trastornos de ansiedad desensibilización y reproceso por movimientos oculares ansiedad ensayos clínicos controlados aleatorizados como asunto |
| Sumario: | [EN]In recent years, eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR) has spread, in both the number of publications and professionals who use this technique in the clinical setting. The objective of this meta-analysis was to verify the efficacy of EMDR in treatment of post-traumatic stress disorder. Based on the inclusion/exclusion criteria, 18 articles were selected ( n = 1213 subjects), published between 1991-2022. The effect sizes found in the meta-analysis were small in the reduction of symptoms associated with PTSD, anxiety and depression, both in post-treatment and in maintenance. The analysis of the moderating variables revealed that both intervention time, the number and duration of the sessions, the experience of the therapist, and the type of therapist in charge of the intervention play an important role in the size of the final effect. No statistically significant data were found in the meta-regression analysis. Although the study had restrictive criteria for study selection, there is a certain risk of bias in the selected articles, which lack sufficient methodological quality to be extrapolated to the clinical field. |
|---|