Efficacy of Psychosocial Interventions for Survivors of Intimate Partner Violence: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Author:

Micklitz Hannah M.1ORCID,Glass Carla M.2,Bengel Jürgen2,Sander Lasse B.1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Medical Psychology and Medical Sociology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany

2. Department of Rehabilitation Psychology and Psychotherapy, Institute of Psychology, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany

Abstract

Survivors of intimate partner violence (IPV) face serious health-related, social and economic consequences. Prior meta-analyses indicate efficacy of psychosocial interventions for support of IPV survivors, but their results are affected by methodological limitations. Extensive subgroup analyses on the moderating effects of intervention and study characteristics are lacking. To address these limitations in an up-to-date and comprehensive meta-analytic review, four literature databases (PsycInfo, Medline, Embase, and CENTRAL, March 23, 2022) were searched for randomized-controlled trials examining the efficacy of psychosocial interventions compared to control groups in improving safety-related, mental health, and psychosocial outcomes in IPV survivors. Weighted effects on IPV, depression, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and psychosocial outcomes were calculated under random-effects assumption. Subgroup analyses were performed to investigate moderating effects of predefined intervention and study characteristics. Study quality was rated. In all, 80 studies were included in qualitative synthesis, and 40 studies in meta-analyses. Psychosocial interventions significantly reduced symptoms of depression (SMD: −0.15 [95% confidence interval, CI [−0.25, −0.04]; p = .006], I2 = 54%) and PTSD (SMD: −0.15 [95% CI [−0.29, −0.01]; p = .04], I2 = 52%), but not IPV reexperience (SMD: −0.02 [95% CI [ −0.09, 0.06]; p = .70], I2 = 21%) compared to control conditions at post. High-intensive and integrative interventions, combining advocacy-based and psychological components, were favorable subgroups. Yielded effects were modest and not maintained long term. The quality of evidence was low and potential harms remain unclear. Future research should adopt higher standards of research conduct and reporting and must account for the complexity and diversity of IPV experiences.

Funder

Rosa Luxemburg Stiftung

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health,Applied Psychology,Health (social science)

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3