Coming to an end: A case study of an ambiguous process of ending psychotherapy

Aim: When the duration of therapy is not preset and the outcome is a matter for negotiation, the decision to end psychotherapy will be an experiential concern for the two participants. This case study draws attention to how ambiguities may be settled in a process where ending is initiated by the therapist and resisted by the client. Method and analysis: The actual case was strategically selected as exceptional owing to a combination of circumstances. The client and the therapist had developed a ‘good enough’ alliance (WAI) and reached a ‘good enough’ outcome (OQ‐45), and still the client felt she was far from finished. A close inspection of interactional data in sessions together with both clients' and therapists' reflections in post‐therapy interviews elicited information about both substantial content and structural aspects of this complicated process of ending. Findings and discussion: The discrepancy between therapist and client was not addressed, but rather postponed and revisited again later. Structural elements like preparations for a break for vacations and reducing the frequency of sessions were used to test experiential qualities, such as how the client managed life without therapy. Carefully preserving a ‘good enough’ emotional bond through the negotiations seemed important to both parties. Significantly, the client's autonomy was interpreted as the final proof of improvement and the client came to a point where she could affirm that she had got better only by accepting that treatment was coming to an end.     

Eye movement desensitization and reprocessing for mental health problems: a systematic review and meta-analysis

ABSTRACT

There is no comprehensive meta-analysis of randomised trials examining the effects of Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR) on post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and no systematic review at all of the effects of EMDR on other mental health problems. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of 76 trials. Most trials examined the effects on PTSD (62%). The effect size of EMDR compared to control conditions was g = 0.93 (95% CI: 0.67–.18), with high heterogeneity (I²= 72%). Only four of 27 studies had low risk of bias, and there were indications for publication bias. EMDR was more effective than other therapies (g = 0.36; 95% CI: 0.14–0.57), but not in studies with low risk of bias. Significant results were also found for EMDR in phobias and test anxiety, but the number of studies was small and risk of bias was high. EMDR was examined in several other mental health problems, but for none of these problems, sufficient studies were available to pool outcomes. EMDR may be effective in the treatment of PTSD in the short term, but the quality of studies is too low to draw definite conclusions. There is not enough evidence to advise it for the use in other mental health problems.