Department of Clinical Psychology, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Department of Clinical Psychology, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Behav Res Ther. 2024 Apr;175:104492. doi: 10.1016/j.brat.2024.104492. Epub 2024 Feb 7.
We studied the mechanisms of eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR) and imagery rescripting (ImRs). We hypothesized that EMDR works via changes in memory vividness, that ImRs works via changes in encapsulated beliefs (EB), and that both treatments work via changes in memory distress. Patients (N = 155) with childhood-related posttraumatic stress disorder (Ch-PTSD) received 12 sessions of EMDR or ImRs. The vividness, distress, and EB related to the index trauma were measured with the Imagery Interview. PTSD severity was assessed with the Impact of Events Scale-Revised and the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale for DSM-5. We conducted mixed regressions and Granger causality analyses. EMDR led to initially stronger changes in all predictors, but only for distress this was retained until the last assessment. No evidence for vividness as a predictive variable was found. However, changes in distress and EB predicted changes in PTSD severity during ImRs. These findings partially support the hypothesized mechanisms of ImRs, while no support was found for the hypothesized mechanisms of EMDR. Differences in the timing of addressing the index trauma during treatment and the timing of assessments could have influenced the findings. This study provides insight into the relative effectiveness and working mechanisms of these treatments.
我们研究了眼动脱敏再处理(EMDR)和意象重述(ImRs)的机制。我们假设 EMDR 通过改变记忆生动度起作用,ImRs 通过改变被包裹的信念(EB)起作用,这两种治疗方法都通过改变记忆困扰起作用。患有与儿童期相关创伤后应激障碍(Ch-PTSD)的患者(N=155)接受了 12 次 EMDR 或 ImRs 治疗。使用意象访谈法测量了与索引创伤相关的记忆生动度、困扰和 EB。使用事件影响量表修订版和 DSM-5 临床医生管理创伤后应激障碍量表评估 PTSD 严重程度。我们进行了混合回归和格兰杰因果分析。EMDR 最初导致所有预测变量的变化更大,但只有困扰的变化一直持续到最后一次评估。没有发现生动度作为预测变量的证据。然而,困扰和 EB 的变化预测了 ImRs 期间 PTSD 严重程度的变化。这些发现部分支持了 ImRs 的假设机制,而 EMDR 的假设机制没有得到支持。治疗期间和评估时间上处理索引创伤的时间差异可能影响了研究结果。这项研究为这些治疗方法的相对有效性和作用机制提供了深入了解。