The Tapping Evidence Base
PTSD & Trauma

EMDR vs EFT trial — PTSD outcome (as tabulated in Stapleton 2023)

Karatzias, T., Power, K., Brown, K., McGoldrick, T., Begum, M., Young, J. et al. · The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease · 2011

Randomized trial👥 27 participants⚖️ vs. EMDR (active comparator)📈 Hedges' -0.15 (small)Higher rigor✓ Source-checked📍 United Kingdom
In plain English. This is the same head-to-head trial of tapping versus EMDR covered elsewhere for its anxiety and depression outcomes. For PTSD specifically, the two treatments again came out roughly even, with no clear winner.

What they found

Hedges' = -0.15
a small effect · 95% CI −0.88–1.59 · on PTSD symptoms
smallmoderatelarge
00.50.82.5

EFT (Table 1 enrollment n=23, analysis n=13 per Table 4) vs EMDR (Table 1 enrollment n=23, analysis n=14): g=−0.15 (95% CI −0.88–1.59, p=0.70), not significant — consistent with this same trial's non-significant PTSD comparison reported in Sebastian & Nelms 2017 (d=−0.12).

How the study worked

Who took partadults with clinically diagnosed PTSD, clinical setting (NHS Scotland) (n=27)
What they didIn a randomized controlled trial, participants were randomly assigned to receive tapping or a comparison condition, then measured and compared.
Compared withEMDR (active comparator)
Measured withPTSD symptom scale (not specified)

💡 Where this could help

Picture a PTSD patient in a public health system where EMDR-trained therapists have long waitlists. If tapping continues to perform comparably to EMDR at scale, it could give patients a genuine second option within stretched systems like the NHS — one that, once learned, they can continue practicing on their own rather than depending on a scarce specialist for every session.

🔬 What to study next

Given the small sample and wide confidence interval here, a much larger head-to-head EFT-vs-EMDR trial is the clear next step, ideally with HRV or cortisol reactivity to trauma-cue exposure measured in both arms, to see whether truly equivalent symptom outcomes ride on a shared physiological recovery pathway. That would help clarify, with adequate power, whether the apparent draw between the two therapies here reflects genuine equivalence or is simply too underpowered to detect a real difference.

The full record

DesignRandomized trial
Participants27 people
Populationadults with clinically diagnosed PTSD, clinical setting (NHS Scotland)
Comparison groupEMDR (active comparator)
Effect sizeHedges' g (EFT vs EMDR) = -0.15 (95% CI −0.88–1.59) — on PTSD symptoms
Outcome measuresPTSD symptom scale (not specified)
JournalThe Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease
Year2011
CountryUnited Kingdom
LanguageEnglish
MethodEFT / tapping
Publication typeStudy / trial
Verification✓ Confirmed against the primary source

Read the original study →

Cite this study

APA

Karatzias, T., Power, K., Brown, K., McGoldrick, T., Begum, M., Young, J., & Adams, S. (2011). EMDR vs EFT trial — PTSD outcome (as tabulated in Stapleton 2023). The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease. https://doi.org/10.1097/NMD.0b013e31821cd262

This record is part of the Tapping Evidence Base — an openly-sourced, fully-referenced directory of the research on EFT/tapping. Explore more studies on PTSD & Trauma

Share this study

A ready-made graphic — right-click or long-press to save the image.

Show shareable card
THE TAPPING EVIDENCE BASE PTSD & Trauma Hedges' -0.15 small effect WHAT THEY FOUND EFT (Table 1 enrollment n=23, analysis n=13per Table 4) vs EMDR (Table 1 enrollmentn=23, analysis n=14): g=−0.15… Randomized trial · 27 participants Karatzias · 2011 · evidence.thetappingsolution.com