EMDR FORUM ARCHIVE, 2000
Re:EMDR for anxiety and phobias
· 10/04/01 at 10:20 PM ET
Well this is rather tiresome but I guess I will follow it through. I cited controlled trials investigating the efficacy of EMDR compared to credible treatments for anxiety disorders, which were published in top-tier scientific peer-reviewed journals. This was to support my position that EMDR is not the preferred treatment for anxiety disorders. We do have treatments shown in numerous rigorous controlled studies and published in top-tier scientific peer-reviewed journals that are highly efficacious and effective for treating anxiety disorders. Why EMDR is being promoted to people on this forum before it is suggesting that people try these known effective treatments is perplexing to me. EMDR is listed as a "probably efficacious" treatment for civilian PTSD by the American Psychological Association Task Force on Empirically Supported Treatments. It is not listed as efficacious for any other anxiety disorder because there is *no credible research evidence* that would support this claim. Now, let's examine E.C.'s supposed supporting citations: One (DeJongh, 1998) is of *a single case study* published by an ardent EMDR proponent in a journal that is not even referenced in PsychInfo (the database that references all respected journals in the field). Now, a case study is intriguing but calls for stronger investigation. These results have not been replicated in more rigorous and controlled investigations, as I noted. The second DeJongh (1999) paper is also not a randomized controlled trial comparing EMDR with a credible treatment for specific phobias. DeJongh even admits (although grudgingly): "The empirical support for EMDR with specific phobias is still meager." DeJongh may be optimistic about how EMDR can cure phobias but he can't cite any randomized controlled studies to support his claims. Furthermore, Francine's book (regardless of edition) is long on criticism of studies showing negative results from EMDR and overly kind to studies, no matter what the quality, that support EMDR. However, no new data is presented that directly tests this hypothesis. Finally, Maxfield's (2000) article is better than nothing but does not contradict the more rigorous studies that I cited (which are published in much higher quality journals). She compared EMDR against no treatment. Based on her research design, it is impossible to conclude that EMDR, per se, had any specific efficacy for test anxiety. Perhaps simply talking to the participants about their anxiety and offering commonsense coping skills during the same period of time would have been equally or even more effective. We simply don't know. She did not compare EMDR to another credible treatment that has known efficacy for treating test anxiety. She didn't even compare EMDR to a placebo treatment condition. EMDR may have been shown to be better than nothing in this study, but clients should expect much more from their therapists. Clients deserve the best that can be offered, not just something that the particular therapist *likes* to do. E.C. makes the bold statement: "EMDR contains components of psychodynamic, behavioral, experiential, cognitive, and body oriented therapies in a combination unique to EMDR." But where is the support this? What E.C. is doing is *assuming* that EMDR is a unique combination and that these elements are highly efficacious in treating anxiety disorders. Again, it is easy to make this claim but until we see some proof, it is merely one person's opinion. In general, E.C. simply bases his/her argument on anecdotal evidence from those who are known proponents and who may have financial ties to promoting the treatment. This doesn't satisfy me, and it shouldn't satisfy clients who are paying for the treatment.
Replies:
|
| Behavior OnLine Home Page | Disclaimer |
Copyright © 1996-2004 Behavior OnLine, Inc. All rights reserved.
