National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) · NICE Guideline NG116 · 2018
NICE's independent evidence review and network meta-analysis of psychological treatments for PTSD found "some promising evidence for clinical benefits of emotional freedom techniques (EFT) on improving self-rated PTSD symptomatology in adults with established PTSD," but did not issue a treatment recommendation for EFT. Instead, NICE issued a formal research recommendation asking what the clinical and cost-effectiveness of EFT for adult PTSD is, citing that the evidence was restricted to military veteran populations, relied mostly on self-rated rather than clinician-rated outcomes, and had limited follow-up data.
The UK's National Institute for Health and Care Excellence — one of the most rigorous, conservative evidence bodies in medicine — looked at the EFT evidence for PTSD and didn't dismiss it. It called the evidence 'promising' while stopping short of a recommendation, and formally asked for more research. That combination of open-minded and rigorous is exactly the kind of scrutiny that, if the follow-up research NICE asked for comes through clean, could move tapping from 'promising' to 'recommended' in national treatment guidelines.
Imagine a civilian trauma survivor — a domestic violence survivor, a car accident victim, a refugee — wondering whether tapping is just for veterans or something that could help them too. NICE's own read is that the promise is real but the evidence so far leans almost entirely on military samples; if that evidence base broadens, it could open the door to a self-taught option that a wider range of trauma survivors could use on their own, without depending on scarce trauma specialists.
NICE's own research recommendation is the roadmap here: trials in civilian populations — assault survivors, refugees, accident victims — not just military veterans, using clinician-rated PTSD outcomes rather than self-report alone, with longer follow-up than the current evidence provides. Adding objective biomarkers like cortisol and heart-rate variability to those future trials would also address the 'is this real change or reporting bias' question NICE is implicitly raising.
| Design | Systematic review |
|---|---|
| Population | adults with established PTSD, primarily military veteran samples within the EFT-specific evidence base reviewed |
| Comparison group | multiple psychological therapies compared via network meta-analysis, including EFT grouped with Thought Field Therapy under "combined somatic and cognitive therapies" |
| Outcome measures | self-rated PTSD symptom measures (clinician-rated measures were limited or absent in the EFT-specific evidence) |
| Journal | NICE Guideline NG116 |
| Year | 2018 |
| Country | United Kingdom |
| Language | English |
| Method | EFT / tapping |
| Publication type | Review or meta-analysis |
| Verification | ✓ Confirmed against the primary source |
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) (2018). Post-traumatic stress disorder: NICE Guideline NG116 — Evidence Review D (psychological, psychosocial and other non-pharmacological interventions). NICE Guideline NG116.
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
A ready-made graphic — right-click or long-press to save the image.