EMDR for Syrian refugees with posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms: results of a pilot randomized controlled trial

Figures & data

Fig. 1 Consort diagram showing the flow of participants through each group. Fifteen participants were in the EMDR condition and 14 participants were assigned to wait-list control condition. The control group did not receive any pharmacological or psychological treatment while the EMDR group received a maximum of seven sessions of treatment (mean=4, 13).

Table 1 Sociodemographic and migration related characteristics of the sample

	EMDR	WL
Sex
Female	11	11
Male	4	3
Age range	19–63	27–60
M (SD)	35.27 (13.21)	37.92 (9.06)	t(26)=0.61, p=0.55
Education (in years)	6.07 (4.29)	5.08 (4.19)	t(25)=0.61, p=0.55
Duration at the camp (in months)	14.44 (4.25)	14.43 (4.99)	t(21)=0.01, p=0.99

Table 2 Means and standard deviations for IES-R and BDI-II scores

	EMDR (N=15)			WL (N=14)
	T1	T2	T3	T1	T2
	Mean (SD)	Mean (SD)	Mean (SD)	Mean (SD)	Mean (SD)
IES-R	64.80 (12.08)	22.87 (20.27)	18.93 (20.31)	56.93 (7.15)	54.21 (16.26)
BDI	22.69 (7.77)	10.15 (9.60)	–	20.64 (8.71)	20.79 (7.92)

T1: pretreatment; T2: posttreatment, T3: 4 weeks follow-up.

Table 3 Statistical comparisons across time and groups

	Time		Time×Group		Posttest (EMDR vs. wait-list)		Pretest/Posttest (EMDR)		Posttest/Follow-up (EMDR)
Measures	df	F-value	df	F-value	df	F- or t-value	df	t-value	df	t-value
BDI	1, 25	7.023*	1, 25	7.35*	25	3.15**	12	4.248***	–	–
IES			–	–	1, 26	24.166***	14	8.243***	14	1.33

*p<0.05; **p<0.01; ***p<0.001.

Fig. 2 Change in the EMDR and the wait-listed groups’ Impact of Event Scores with Standard error bars across time.

Fig. 3 EMDR and wait-listed groups’ depression scores with standard error bars as a function of time.