Acceptability and delivery of an offer of access to EMDR for depression, posttraumatic stress, and burnout in healthcare workers exposed to COVID-19: a randomized controlled trial within a cohort
Abstract
Healthcare workers (HCWs) were highly exposed to COVID-19 and often experienced anxiety, depression, burnout, and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The HARD trial assessed the effect of being offered access to EMDR therapy on HCWs with COVID-19-related psychological symptoms. This cohort-embedded randomized trial enrolled 849 HCWs exposed to COVID-19. Participants completed online assessments every 3 months for 12 months. Those scoring above predefined thresholds for PTSD, depression, or burnout were randomized (1:1) to an offer of access to EMDR or to usual care alone. Outcomes compared 6-month changes in PTSD, depression, and burnout symptoms, and EMDR compliance was evaluated. A total of 237 eligible cohort participants were randomized in the HARD trial. Among the 118 subjects of the intervention offer, 73 (62%) consented to EMDR sessions, and of these, 38 (52%) received EMDR sessions (median 7, IQR 4 to 12 sessions). Primary analysis estimated a mean difference between groups from baseline to 6 months post-randomization of -0.61 (p = 0.77) for the PTSD score, -1.17 (p = 0.18) for the depression score, and 0.32 (p = 0.72) for the burnout subdimension. Improvements favoring the intervention offer group were observed for depressive symptoms and PTSD avoidance at 12 months. In this pragmatic trial, uptake and adherence to an offer of EMDR among symptomatic HCWs were limited. No statistically significant between-group differences were detected in the prespecified six-month primary outcomes, although the study recruited substantially fewer participants than planned and was therefore underpowered, treatment exposure varied substantially, and the intervention was not subject to systematic fidelity monitoring. These findings primarily provide information about real-world acceptability (a modest 62% consent rate) and delivery (only 52% of consenting participants used the intervention). Our ability to draw conclusions about potential effectiveness of EMDR, if used, however, was limited by the law rate of consent to access the intervention among those offered program access and the law rate of usage among those who did not consent.
Related
- Feasibility and acceptability of a randomized controlled trial of a patient-centred transition program for stroke survivors and their caregivers—P-NAVISTROKE study
- Feasibility, Acceptability, and Appropriateness of an 8-Week Supervised Aerobic Exercise Intervention for Adults With Epilepsy: Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.
- SOFTPEERS: feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary effectiveness of a peer-led intervention to prevent binge drinking in adolescents. Results from a mixed-methods pilot cluster-randomized controlled trial
- Feasibility and Acceptability of Videoconference-Based Family Psychoeducation for Young Adult Caregivers of Family Members With Major Depressive Disorder: Protocol for a Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.
- Efficacy of High‐Frequency Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Therapy for Depression With Insomnia Symptoms: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis Based on Randomized Controlled Trials
BibTeX
@article{elhage2026acceptability,
title = {{Acceptability and delivery of an offer of access to EMDR for depression, posttraumatic stress, and burnout in healthcare workers exposed to COVID-19: a randomized controlled trial within a cohort}},
author = {Wissam El-Hage and Laurène Mansy and Valérie Gissot and Myriam Blanchin and Lyna Chami and Antoine Bray and Coraline Hingray and Philippe Birmes and Chantal Bergey and Bénédicte Gohier and Eric Fakra and Anne Sauvaget and Cédric Lemogne and Marie-Odile Krebs and Bruno Aouizerate and Isabelle Jalenques and Pierre Vidailhet and Nathalie Prieto and Eric Bui and Agnès Caille},
journal = {Scientific Reports},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.1038/s41598-026-73880-2},
url = {https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-026-73880-2},
note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Acceptability and delivery of an offer of access to EMDR for depression, posttraumatic stress, and burnout in healthcare workers exposed to COVID-19: a randomized controlled trial within a cohort
AU - Wissam El-Hage
AU - Laurène Mansy
AU - Valérie Gissot
AU - Myriam Blanchin
AU - Lyna Chami
AU - Antoine Bray
AU - Coraline Hingray
AU - Philippe Birmes
AU - Chantal Bergey
AU - Bénédicte Gohier
AU - Eric Fakra
AU - Anne Sauvaget
AU - Cédric Lemogne
AU - Marie-Odile Krebs
AU - Bruno Aouizerate
AU - Isabelle Jalenques
AU - Pierre Vidailhet
AU - Nathalie Prieto
AU - Eric Bui
AU - Agnès Caille
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/20
JO - Scientific Reports
DO - 10.1038/s41598-026-73880-2
UR - https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-026-73880-2
AB - Healthcare workers (HCWs) were highly exposed to COVID-19 and often experienced anxiety, depression, burnout, and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The HARD trial assessed the effect of being offered access to EMDR therapy on HCWs with COVID-19-related psychological symptoms. This cohort-embedded randomized trial enrolled 849 HCWs exposed to COVID-19. Participants completed online assessments every 3 months for 12 months. Those scoring above predefined thresholds for PTSD, depression, or burnout were randomized (1:1) to an offer of access to EMDR or to usual care alone. Outcomes compared 6-month changes in PTSD, depression, and burnout symptoms, and EMDR compliance was evaluated. A total of 237 eligible cohort participants were randomized in the HARD trial. Among the 118 subjects of the intervention offer, 73 (62%) consented to EMDR sessions, and of these, 38 (52%) received EMDR sessions (median 7, IQR 4 to 12 sessions). Primary analysis estimated a mean difference between groups from baseline to 6 months post-randomization of -0.61 (p = 0.77) for the PTSD score, -1.17 (p = 0.18) for the depression score, and 0.32 (p = 0.72) for the burnout subdimension. Improvements favoring the intervention offer group were observed for depressive symptoms and PTSD avoidance at 12 months. In this pragmatic trial, uptake and adherence to an offer of EMDR among symptomatic HCWs were limited. No statistically significant between-group differences were detected in the prespecified six-month primary outcomes, although the study recruited substantially fewer participants than planned and was therefore underpowered, treatment exposure varied substantially, and the intervention was not subject to systematic fidelity monitoring. These findings primarily provide information about real-world acceptability (a modest 62% consent rate) and delivery (only 52% of consenting participants used the intervention). Our ability to draw conclusions about potential effectiveness of EMDR, if used, however, was limited by the law rate of consent to access the intervention among those offered program access and the law rate of usage among those who did not consent.
SN - 2045-2322
ER -