EMDR has had more published case reports and controlled outcome research to support it than any other method used in the treatment of post traumatic stress disorder. Over 40,000 clinicians have been trained world-wide, which is considered mandatory for appropriate use.

In 1995, the APA Division 12 (Clinical Psychology) initiated a project to determine the degree to which extant therapeutic methods were supported by solid empirical evidence. Independent reviewers (Chambless et al., 1998) recently placed EMDR on a list of empirically validated treatments, as "probably efficacious for civilian PTSD." At the same time, exposure therapy (e.g., flooding) and stress inoculation therapy (SIT) were described as "probably efficacious for PTSD," while no other therapies were judged to be empirically supported by controlled research for any posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) population. A meta-analysis of all psychological and drug treatments for PTSD reported: "The results of the present study suggest that EMDR is effective for PTSD, and that it is more efficient than other treatments." (Van Etten & Taylor, 1998; see also Allen, Keller & Console, 1999; Feske, 1998; Lipke, 1999; Spector & Read, 1999).

See Shapiro (1995) for procedures, protocols, theories, and discussion of clinically valid research criteria . See Shapiro & Forrest (1997) for a comprehensive narrative of cases, and in-session transcripts, and "EMDR for Trauma" in the APA Psychotherapy Videotape series.

Since the initial efficacy study (Shapiro, 1989a), positive therapeutic results with EMDR have been reported with a wide range of populations including the following:

1. Combat veterans from Desert Storm, the Vietnam War, the Korean War, and World War II who were formerly treatment resistant and who no longer experience flashbacks, nightmares, and other PTSD sequelae (Blore, 1997b; Carlson, Chemtob, Rusnak, & Hedlund, 1996; Daniels, Lipke, Richardson, & Silver,1992; Lipke & Botkin, 1992; Thomas & Gafner, 1993; White, 1998; Young, 1995).

2. Persons with phobias and panic disorder who revealed a rapid reduction of fear and symptomatology (Doctor, 1994; de Jongh & ten Broeke, 1998; de Jongh, ten Broeke & Renssen, 1999; Feske & Goldstein, 1997; Goldstein, 1992; Goldstein & Feske, 1994; Kleinknecht, 1993; Nadler, 1996; O'Brien, 1993).

3. Crime victims and police officers who are no longer disturbed by the aftereffects of violent assaults (Baker & McBride, 1991; Kleinknecht & Morgan, 1992; Page & Crino, 1993; Shapiro & Solomon, 1995; Solomon, 1995, in press).

4. People relieved of excessive grief due to the loss of a loved one or to line-of-duty deaths, such as engineers no longer devastated with guilt because their train unavoidably killed pedestrians (Puk, 1991a; Solomon, 1994, 1995, in press; Shapiro & Solomon, 1995).

5. Children healed of the symptoms caused by the trauma of assault or natural disaster (Chemtob, Nakashima, Hamada & Carlson, 1996; Cocco & Sharpe, 1993; Datta and Wallace, 1994, 1996; Greenwald, 1994, 1998, 1999; Lovett, 1999; Pellicer, 1993; Puffer, Greenwald & Elrod, in press; Shapiro, 1991; Tinker & Wilson, 1999).

6. Sexual assault victims who are now able to lead normal lives and have intimate relationships (Hyer, 1995; Parnell, 1994, 1999; Puk, 1991a; Shapiro,1989b, 1991, 1994; Wolpe & Abrams, 1991).

7. Accident, surgery, and burn victims who were once emotionally or physically debilitated and who are now able to resume productive lives (Blore, 1997a; Hassard, 1993; McCann, 1992; Puk, 1992; Solomon & Kaufman, 1994).

8. Victims of sexual dysfunction who are now able to maintain healthy sexual relationships (Levin, 1993; Wernik, 1993).

9. Clients at all stages of chemical dependency, and pathological gamblers, who now show stable recovery and a decreased tendency to relapse (Henry, 1996 ; Shapiro, Vogelmann-Sine, & Sine, 1994).

10. People with dissociative disorders who progress at a rate more rapid than that achieved by traditional treatment (Fine, 1994; Lazrove, 1994; Lazrove & Fine, in press; Marquis & Puk, 1994; Paulsen, 1995; Rouanzoin, 1994; Young, 1994).

11. People engaged in business, performing arts, and sport who have benefited from EMDR as a tool to help enhance performance (Crabbe, 1996; Foster & Lendl, 1995, 1996).

12. Clients with a wide variety of PTSD and other diagnoses who experience substantial benefit from EMDR (Allen & Lewis, 1996; Brown, McGoldrick, & Buchanan, 1997; Cohn, 1993; Fensterheim, 1996; Forbes, Creamer, & Rycroft, 1994; Manfield, 1998; Marquis, 1991; Parnell, 1996; 1997; Puk,1991b; Shapiro & Forrest, 1997; Spates & Burnette, 1995; Spector & Huthwaite, 1993; Vaughan, Wiese, Gold, & Tarrier, 1994; Wolpe & Abrams, 1991).

There are more controlled studies on EMDR than on any other method used in the treatment of PTSD (Shapiro, 1995a,b, 1996, in press; Spector & Read, in press; Van Etten & Taylor, 1998). A literature review indicated only 6 other controlled clinical outcome studies (excluding drugs) in the entire field of PTSD (Solomon, Gerrity, and Muff, 1992).

next: News Stories on Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR)