A randomized controlled dismantling study of Visual Schema Displacement Therapy (VSDT) vs an abbreviated EMDR protocol vs a non-active control condition in individuals with disturbing memories 具有痛苦记忆的个体中视觉模式替换治疗 (VSDT) 与简化版EMDR方案和非主动控制条件的随机对照分解研究 Un estudio de desmantelamiento controlado aleatorizado de la terapia de desplazamiento del esquema visual (VSDT) versus un protocolo EMDR abreviado versus una condición de control no activa en individuos con recuerdos perturbadores

© 2021 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.Background: Visual Schema Displacement Therapy (VSDT) is a novel therapy for the treatment of fears and trauma-related mental health problems including PTSD. VSDT proved to be effective in reducing emotionality of aversive memories in healthy individuals in two previous randomized controlled trials and outperformed both a non-active control condition (CC) and an abbreviated version of EMDR therapy, a well-established first-line treatment for posttraumatic stress disorder. Objectives: In an effort to enhance the understanding concerning the efficacy of VSDT, and to determine its active components, a dismantling study was conducted in individuals with disturbing memories in which the effects of VSDT were tested against EMDR therapy, a non-active CC and three different VSDT-protocols, each excluding or altering a hypothesized active component. Method: Participants (N = 144) were asked to recall an emotional aversive event and were randomly assigned to one of these six interventions, each lasting 8 minutes. Emotional disturbance and vividness of participants’ memories were rated before and after the intervention and at one and four-week follow-up. Results: Replicatory Bayesian analyses supported hypotheses in which VSDT was superior to the CC and the EMDR condition in reducing emotionality, both directly after the intervention and at one week follow-up. However, at four-week follow-up, VSDT proved equal to EMDR while both treatments were superior to the CC. Concerning vividness the data also showed support for hypotheses predicting VSDT being equal to EMDR and both being superior to the CC in vividness reduction. Further analyses specifying differences between the abbreviated VSDT protocols detected no differences between these conditions. Conclusion: It remains unclear how VSDT yields its positive effects. Because VSDT appears to be unique and effective in decreasing emotionality of aversive memories, replication of the results in clinical samples is needed.