EMDR Beyond PTSD: Pain, Phobias, Addiction, Grief, and Performance

Category: Somatic Therapy / EMDR | Level: Serpent (South) to Hummingbird (North) — Medicine Wheel

---

The Scope of Bilateral Processing

EMDR was born as a trauma therapy and earned its empirical credentials through PTSD research. But Francine Shapiro’s Adaptive Information Processing (AIP) model makes a broader claim: that many psychological disorders — not just PTSD — are driven by unprocessed memories stored in state-specific, maladaptive form. If this is true, then EMDR’s bilateral processing should be effective for any condition rooted in dysfunctionally stored experience.

The evidence increasingly supports this broader application. Over the past three decades, EMDR has been adapted and tested for chronic pain, specific phobias, performance anxiety, complicated grief, substance use disorders, phantom limb pain, obsessive-compulsive disorder, and medically unexplained symptoms. In each case, the clinical logic is the same: identify the memory or memory network that drives the condition, process it through the eight-phase protocol, and allow the adaptive information processing system to do what it does — integrate the experience, extract the learning, and release the pathological charge.

This article examines the evidence and clinical protocols for EMDR’s applications beyond PTSD, with particular attention to the somatic, autonomic, and integrative dimensions that connect these applications to functional medicine, polyvagal theory, and Traditional Chinese Medicine.

EMDR for Chronic Pain

The Memory-Pain Connection

Chronic pain is not simply a signal of tissue damage. It is a complex, multidimensional experience involving sensory, emotional, cognitive, and social components, all modulated by the central nervous system. The biopsychosocial model of pain (Engel, 1977; Gatchel et al., 2007) recognizes that persistent pain involves central sensitization — the nervous system amplifies pain signals independently of peripheral input. The pain becomes self-perpetuating: the nervous system has learned to hurt.

The AIP model proposes that specific memories contribute to the sensitization process. The memory of the original injury, the memory of being told “you’ll never be pain-free,” the memories of helplessness, loss, and identity disruption that accompany chronic pain — these unprocessed experiences maintain the neural pathways that sustain the pain experience.

Grant and Threlfo (2002) first demonstrated that EMDR could reduce chronic pain that had been refractory to other treatments. They hypothesized that processing the memories associated with pain onset reduced the emotional amplification of the pain signal, allowing the sensory component to normalize.

Brennstuhl’s Research

Mylene Brennstuhl and colleagues (2019) conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of EMDR for chronic pain conditions including fibromyalgia, phantom limb pain, chronic low back pain, and headache. Their findings confirmed that EMDR produced significant reductions in pain intensity, pain-related disability, and psychological distress across conditions. The effect sizes were clinically meaningful — not marginal reductions but substantial decreases in suffering.

Critically, Brennstuhl’s review found that the pain reduction was not merely a secondary effect of reduced psychological distress. EMDR appeared to produce direct changes in the pain experience itself — the sensory, not just the affective, dimension of pain was altered. This is consistent with the hypothesis that bilateral processing modifies the neural representation of the pain memory, including its sensory components.

The Pain Protocol

Mark Grant’s EMDR pain protocol (Grant, 2009) adapts the standard eight-phase protocol for chronic pain:

Phase 1 — History: Map the pain history. When did the pain begin? What was happening in the person’s life? What memories are associated with pain onset, exacerbation, and moments of relief? What beliefs about the pain exist (“This will never get better,” “My body is broken,” “I must have done something to deserve this”)?

Phase 2 — Preparation: Teach pain management resources: safe place (which becomes a “comfort place” for pain clients), body scan for areas of ease (not just areas of pain), and breathing techniques. Establish the resource of “pain-free” moments — even brief ones — as positive targets.

Phase 3 — Assessment: Target the memory most associated with the pain. This may be the moment of injury, the moment of diagnosis, or a moment of helplessness. Identify the negative cognition (“I am broken”), positive cognition (“My body can heal”), SUD, VoC, emotions, and body location.

Phase 4 — Desensitization: Process the target memory using standard bilateral stimulation. Pain clients often report spontaneous changes in pain intensity, location, or quality during processing — pain may move, shift, decrease, or briefly intensify before resolving. The clinician follows the client’s associative process without directing it.

Phase 5-8: Standard installation, body scan (particularly important — scan specifically for pain changes), closure, and re-evaluation.

Autonomic and Functional Medicine Connections

Chronic pain and autonomic dysregulation are inseparable. Chronic pain activates the sympathetic nervous system, which increases muscle tension, vasoconstriction, and inflammation — all of which amplify pain. The pain-tension-pain cycle is mediated by the autonomic nervous system.

EMDR’s capacity to shift autonomic state from sympathetic to parasympathetic (Elofsson et al., 2008) directly addresses this cycle. By processing the memories that maintain sympathetic hyperactivation, EMDR may reduce the autonomic contribution to pain perpetuation.

In functional medicine terms, chronic pain patients often present with elevated inflammatory markers (CRP, IL-6, TNF-alpha), HPA axis dysregulation (cortisol abnormalities), and gut-brain axis disruption. These downstream effects of chronic stress/pain may improve as the autonomic dysregulation resolves through somatic processing.

In Traditional Chinese Medicine, chronic pain is understood as qi stagnation — the blockage of vital energy flow through the meridian system. The emotional component of pain (anger, grief, fear) contributes to this stagnation. EMDR’s processing of the emotional memories associated with pain may parallel acupuncture’s release of qi stagnation — different entry points into the same underlying pattern.

EMDR for Phobias

Specific Phobias and the Memory Network

Specific phobias — fear of flying, spiders, heights, blood, enclosed spaces — are among the most common anxiety disorders, affecting approximately 7-9% of the population (American Psychiatric Association, 2013). Cognitive-behavioral therapy with exposure is the established treatment. But EMDR offers an alternative pathway that targets the memory network underlying the phobia rather than relying on habituation through repeated exposure.

The AIP model proposes that specific phobias are maintained by one or more unprocessed memories: the direct experience that installed the fear (a dog bite, a turbulent flight), the vicarious experience (watching a parent panic during a thunderstorm), or the informational experience (a news story about a plane crash). These memories are stored with the sensory-emotional intensity of the original moment, and when a phobia trigger appears, the memory network activates — producing the disproportionate fear response characteristic of phobias.

De Jongh, Ten Broeke, and Renssen (1999) demonstrated that EMDR could effectively treat specific phobias by targeting these etiological memories. In their protocol, the clinician identifies the memory that the client associates with the onset of the phobia, processes it through standard EMDR, and then addresses any remaining fear through future template work (Phase 8 — the client imagines encountering the feared stimulus in the future and any remaining disturbance is processed).

De Jongh and colleagues (2002) conducted a randomized controlled trial comparing EMDR to in vivo exposure for dental phobia. Both treatments were effective, but EMDR required significantly fewer sessions and produced comparable long-term outcomes.

De Roos and Children

Carlijn de Roos and colleagues (2017) extended EMDR’s phobia treatment to children, demonstrating that children respond well to bilateral processing of fear memories. Their research showed that EMDR was effective for children’s phobias, anxiety disorders, and PTSD, often producing faster results than CBT-based approaches. Children, whose memory networks are less consolidated and more plastic than adults’, may be particularly responsive to the memory reconsolidation mechanism that EMDR employs.

EMDR for Performance Anxiety

The Somatic Dimension of Performance Fear

Performance anxiety — whether in athletics, music, public speaking, or sexual function — is fundamentally a somatic phenomenon. The performer’s body betrays them: trembling hands, racing heart, constricted throat, frozen muscles, blank mind. These are not cognitive problems amenable to rational restructuring. They are autonomic nervous system responses — sympathetic activation triggered by the performance situation.

The AIP model locates the source of performance anxiety in memories of failure, humiliation, judgment, or loss of control associated with past performances. A pianist who blanked during a childhood recital may carry that memory — with its sensory-emotional charge intact — into every subsequent performance. The adult nervous system responds to the current performance situation as if the childhood humiliation is happening again.

Barker and Barker (2007) applied EMDR to performance anxiety in musicians and found significant reductions in performance anxiety, along with measurable improvements in performance quality as rated by blind judges. The mechanism is straightforward: processing the memories that trigger sympathetic activation in performance situations allows the nervous system to remain in the ventral vagal state during performance — the state of calm alertness and social engagement that supports optimal performance.

Foster and Lendl (1996) developed the EMDR Performance Enhancement Protocol (PEP) specifically for performance optimization. The protocol:

1. Target the memory of the worst performance or performance-related failure
2. Process the negative cognition associated with performance (“I will fail,” “I am not good enough”)
3. Install the positive cognition (“I can trust my preparation,” “I am capable”)
4. Create a future template of successful performance
5. Install the future template with bilateral stimulation

The performance enhancement application reveals EMDR’s broader potential: it is not merely a therapy for pathology but a technology for optimizing human function by resolving the stored experiences that constrain performance.

EMDR for Addiction: The DeTur Protocol

Addiction as a Memory Disorder

Substance use disorders are among the most treatment-resistant conditions in mental health. Relapse rates remain discouragingly high across treatment modalities. The AIP model offers a perspective on why: addiction is driven by memory networks that standard addiction treatment does not address.

The memories that drive addiction operate at multiple levels: the traumatic memories that produce the emotional pain the substance numbs, the positive memories associated with substance use (the first drink that produced relief, the first high that dissolved anxiety), and the trigger memories that activate craving (the smell of a bar, the sight of a lighter, the feeling of loneliness on a Friday night).

A. J. Popky (2005) developed the Desensitization of Triggers and Urge Reprocessing (DeTUR) protocol specifically for substance use disorders. DeTUR targets not the traumatic memories underlying addiction (though these may be addressed separately using standard EMDR) but the triggers and positive feeling states associated with substance use.

The DeTUR Protocol

Step 1 — Identify triggers: Map the external and internal triggers that activate craving. External triggers include people, places, things, and situations associated with use. Internal triggers include emotional states (loneliness, anger, boredom, shame) and physical sensations (pain, restlessness, fatigue).

Step 2 — Establish a Positive Treatment Goal (PTG): Identify the positive state the client hopes to achieve through recovery — not the absence of using, but the presence of something desirable: “I am free,” “I am in control of my choices,” “I am present for my family.”

Step 3 — Level of Urge (LOU) assessment: For each trigger, assess the Level of Urge to use on a 0-10 scale. This is analogous to the SUD scale but specific to craving.

Step 4 — Process triggers: For each trigger, the client holds the trigger in awareness while bilateral stimulation is applied. Processing continues until the LOU reaches 0 or 1 — the trigger no longer activates craving.

Step 5 — Install PTG: The Positive Treatment Goal is paired with the processed trigger and installed using bilateral stimulation. The client imagines encountering the trigger while maintaining the positive state.

Step 6 — Process underlying trauma: Once triggers are desensitized, standard EMDR is used to process the traumatic memories that drove the addiction. This is critical — trigger desensitization without trauma processing addresses symptoms without resolving causes.

Hase and colleagues (2008) conducted a randomized controlled trial of EMDR plus treatment as usual versus treatment as usual alone for alcohol dependence. The EMDR group showed significantly greater reductions in craving, depressive symptoms, and posttraumatic symptoms at one-month follow-up.

IFS Integration for Addiction

The IFS model provides a complementary framework for understanding addiction. In IFS terms, the substance-using behavior is carried by a Firefighter part — an emergency responder that deploys substances to extinguish the unbearable emotional pain carried by Exiles. The addiction is not the problem; it is the Firefighter’s solution to the problem. The problem is the unprocessed pain in the Exile.

Combining EMDR (to process the traumatic memories) with IFS (to work with the parts system) creates a comprehensive approach to addiction that addresses both the memory networks and the internal relational dynamics that maintain addictive behavior.

EMDR for Complicated Grief

When Grief Cannot Complete

Normal grief, though agonizing, moves through a natural process: the bereaved gradually adjusts to the reality of the loss, integrates the lost relationship into their ongoing narrative, and re-engages with life. Complicated grief — also called prolonged grief disorder, now included in the ICD-11 and DSM-5-TR — is grief that becomes stuck. The bereaved cannot accept the reality of the loss, cannot integrate the experience, cannot function. The loss remains a perpetual, present wound.

The AIP model frames complicated grief as a processing failure: the memories associated with the death (the moment of notification, the hospital scene, the funeral, the last conversation) are stored in unprocessed form, with full sensory-emotional intensity. The bereaved is not merely remembering the loss — they are reliving it, repeatedly, as though it is happening now.

Solomon and Rando (2012) developed EMDR protocols for complicated grief that target specific memory components:

1. The death scene: The visual image associated with the death or notification of death
2. The last interaction: The final conversation, visit, or contact with the deceased — particularly if it involved conflict, things left unsaid, or missed opportunities
3. The “should haves”: Memories of perceived failures — not being present at the death, not saying goodbye, not preventing the death
4. The “firsts”: First holiday without the person, first birthday, first anniversary — each a trigger for the unprocessed loss

Processing these memories through EMDR does not erase the grief. It transforms it from complicated (stuck, pathological, life-disrupting) to uncomplicated (painful but moving, integrating, compatible with ongoing life).

EMDR for Phantom Limb Pain

The Neural Map That Persists

Phantom limb pain — pain experienced in a limb that has been amputated — is one of the most dramatic demonstrations that pain is a brain event, not a tissue event. The limb is gone, but the neural map of the limb persists in the somatosensory cortex, continuing to generate pain signals in the absence of any peripheral input.

Ramachandran and Rogers-Ramachandran (1996) demonstrated that visual feedback (mirror therapy) could reduce phantom limb pain by providing the brain with corrective sensory input. EMDR may work through a related mechanism: by processing the memories associated with the amputation and the pain, EMDR modifies the neural representation of the lost limb.

Schneider, Hofmann, Rost, and Shapiro (2008) published a case series of EMDR for phantom limb pain, reporting significant reductions in pain intensity and frequency. They hypothesized that processing the traumatic memories of the injury and amputation reduced the emotional amplification of the phantom pain signal, allowing the somatosensory cortex to reorganize.

De Roos and colleagues (2010) provided further support, demonstrating that EMDR reduced phantom limb pain in a controlled study. The mechanism appears to involve both memory processing (reducing the emotional charge of amputation-related memories) and direct modulation of the somatosensory representation (changing how the brain maps the absent limb).

The Autonomic Nervous System as the Common Thread

Across all these applications — pain, phobias, performance anxiety, addiction, grief, phantom limb pain — the common mechanism is autonomic nervous system modulation. In every case:

1. Dysfunctional memories maintain autonomic dysregulation: The unprocessed memories keep the nervous system in sympathetic hyperactivation (pain amplification, phobic fear, performance panic, craving) or dorsal vagal collapse (grief numbness, dissociative anesthesia).

2. Bilateral stimulation shifts autonomic state: The eye movements or other bilateral stimuli trigger an orienting response that produces parasympathetic activation, creating the conditions for memory reconsolidation.

3. Processing resolves the autonomic dysregulation: As the memories are processed and integrated, the nervous system releases its defensive holding pattern and returns to flexible, regulated functioning.

This autonomic model explains why EMDR works across such diverse conditions: it is not a condition-specific treatment. It is an autonomic regulation technology that operates through memory reconsolidation. Any condition maintained by dysfunctionally stored memories and their autonomic consequences is a potential EMDR target.

The Four Directions Integration

The breadth of EMDR’s applications maps elegantly onto the Four Directions:

Serpent (South) — The body applications: chronic pain, phantom limb pain, somatic symptoms. EMDR processes the body’s stored experience, releasing the physical holding patterns that maintain suffering. The Serpent teaches that healing begins in the flesh.

Jaguar (West) — The emotional applications: phobias, grief, the emotional dimensions of addiction. EMDR transforms the stuck emotional charge of traumatic memories, allowing grief to flow, fear to resolve, and the emotional drivers of addiction to release. The Jaguar teaches that we must face what we fear.

Hummingbird (North) — The meaning applications: performance enhancement, the cognitive restructuring of negative beliefs. EMDR installs positive cognitions that reframe the person’s relationship to their experience. “I am broken” becomes “I can heal.” “I will fail” becomes “I can trust myself.” The Hummingbird teaches that the soul’s journey requires new stories.

Eagle (East) — The witnessing perspective: the capacity to observe one’s own experience — pain, fear, craving, grief — without being consumed by it. EMDR’s processing often produces spontaneous shifts into a witnessing consciousness that observes the traumatic material with compassion and clarity. The Eagle teaches that the ultimate healing is not the absence of suffering but the presence of awareness.

TCM Perspective: Bilateral Stimulation and Meridian Balance

Traditional Chinese Medicine offers additional insight into why bilateral stimulation might be therapeutic. The body’s twelve primary meridians are bilateral — mirrored on left and right sides of the body. Each pair of bilateral meridians corresponds to a specific organ system and emotional association:

• Lung/Large Intestine (grief, letting go)
• Stomach/Spleen (worry, overthinking)
• Heart/Small Intestine (joy, connection)
• Bladder/Kidney (fear, will)
• Pericardium/Triple Burner (protection, social warmth)
• Gallbladder/Liver (anger, decision-making)

Bilateral stimulation — whether through eye movements, alternating taps, or bilateral auditory tones — may facilitate the balanced flow of qi through these bilateral meridian pairs. When qi flows freely through both left and right channels, the emotional associations of each meridian pair can resolve: grief can complete, fear can release, anger can transform.

This is speculative but clinically suggestive. The EMDR practitioner who is also trained in TCM may observe that specific emotions arising during bilateral processing correspond to the meridian pairs activated by the bilateral stimulus. The body’s wisdom speaks through both neurological and energetic channels.

---

References

American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed.). American Psychiatric Publishing.

Barker, K. N., & Barker, R. T. (2007). The use of EMDR in reducing presentation anxiety. Journal of EMDR Practice and Research, 1(2), 100-108.

Brennstuhl, M. J., Tarquinio, C., & Bassan, F. (2019). EMDR for chronic pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of EMDR Practice and Research, 13(4), 225-244.

de Jongh, A., Ten Broeke, E., & Renssen, M. R. (1999). Treatment of specific phobias with Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR): Protocol, empirical status, and conceptual issues. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 13(1-2), 69-85.

de Jongh, A., Muris, P., Schoenmakers, N., & Ter Horst, G. (2002). Negative cognitions of dental phobics: Reliability and validity of the Dental Cognitions Questionnaire. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 40(7), 313-325.

de Roos, C., Greenwald, R., den Hollander-Gijsman, M., Noorthoorn, E., van Buuren, S., & de Jongh, A. (2017). A randomised comparison of cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) and eye movement desensitisation and reprocessing (EMDR) in disaster-exposed children. European Journal of Psychotraumatology, 8(1), 1283581.

de Roos, C., Veenstra, A. C., de Jongh, A., den Hollander-Gijsman, M. E., van der Wee, N. J., Zitman, F. G., & van Rood, Y. R. (2010). Treatment of chronic phantom limb pain using a trauma-focused psychological approach. Pain Research and Management, 15(2), 65-71.

Elofsson, U. O. E., von Schéele, B., Theorell, T., & Söndergaard, H. P. (2008). Physiological correlates of eye movement desensitization and reprocessing. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 22(4), 622-634.

Engel, G. L. (1977). The need for a new medical model: A challenge for biomedicine. Science, 196(4286), 129-136.

Foster, S., & Lendl, J. (1996). Eye movement desensitization and reprocessing: Four case studies of a new tool for executive coaching and restoring employee performance after setbacks. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 48(3), 155-161.

Gatchel, R. J., Peng, Y. B., Peters, M. L., Fuchs, P. N., & Turk, D. C. (2007). The biopsychosocial approach to chronic pain: Scientific advances and future directions. Psychological Bulletin, 133(4), 581-624.

Grant, M. (2009). Change your brain, change your pain. Unpublished manuscript.

Grant, M., & Threlfo, C. (2002). EMDR in the treatment of chronic pain. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 58(12), 1505-1520.

Hase, M., Schallmayer, S., & Sack, M. (2008). EMDR reprocessing of the addiction memory: Pretreatment, posttreatment, and 1-month follow-up. Journal of EMDR Practice and Research, 2(3), 170-179.

Popky, A. J. (2005). DeTUR, an urge reduction protocol for addictions and dysfunctional behaviors. In R. Shapiro (Ed.), EMDR Solutions: Pathways to Healing (pp. 167-188). W. W. Norton.

Ramachandran, V. S., & Rogers-Ramachandran, D. (1996). Synaesthesia in phantom limbs induced with mirrors. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 263(1369), 377-386.

Schneider, J., Hofmann, A., Rost, C., & Shapiro, F. (2008). EMDR in the treatment of chronic phantom limb pain. Pain Medicine, 9(1), 76-82.

Solomon, R. M., & Rando, T. A. (2012). Treatment of grief and mourning through EMDR: Conceptual considerations and clinical guidelines. European Review of Applied Psychology, 62(4), 231-239.