Judit Tirado-Muñoz1, Gail Gilchrist, Magí Farré, Kelsey Hegarty, Marta Torrens. 1. Addiction Research and Human Pharmacology Groups, Neurosciences Research Program, IMIM-Institut Hospital del Mar d'Investigacions Mèdiques, Institute of Neuropsychiatry and Addictions , Parc de Salut Mar de Barcelona, Barcelona , Spain.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the efficacy of Advocacy and Cognitive Behavioural Therapy interventions (CBT) in reducing physical, psychological, sexual, or any intimate partner violence (IPV). METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted using randomized control trials (RCTs) published in MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Scopus, Cochrane, and Clinical trials. The occurrence of physical, psychological, sexual, and/or any IPV measured efficacy. RESULTS: Twelve RCTs involving 2666 participants were included. Advocacy interventions resulted in significant reductions in physical (standardized mean difference (SMD) -0.13; 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.25, -0.00) and psychological (SMD -0.19; 95% CI -0.32, -0.05) but not in sexual (SMD -0.20; 95% CI -0.43, 0.02) or any IPV (SMD -0.32; 95% CI -0.69, 0.04). CBT interventions showed a significant reduction in physical (SMD -0.79; 95% CI -1.26, -0.33) and psychological (SMD -0.80; 95% CI -1.25, -0.36) but not sexual (SMD -0.35; 95% CI -1.73, 1.03) or any IPV (SMD 0.09; 95% CI -0.05, 0.23). CONCLUSIONS: Both advocacy and CBT interventions reduced physical and psychological IPV but not sexual or any IPV. Limitations include the low number of studies and the heterogeneity of interventions.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the efficacy of Advocacy and Cognitive Behavioural Therapy interventions (CBT) in reducing physical, psychological, sexual, or any intimate partner violence (IPV). METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted using randomized control trials (RCTs) published in MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Scopus, Cochrane, and Clinical trials. The occurrence of physical, psychological, sexual, and/or any IPV measured efficacy. RESULTS: Twelve RCTs involving 2666 participants were included. Advocacy interventions resulted in significant reductions in physical (standardized mean difference (SMD) -0.13; 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.25, -0.00) and psychological (SMD -0.19; 95% CI -0.32, -0.05) but not in sexual (SMD -0.20; 95% CI -0.43, 0.02) or any IPV (SMD -0.32; 95% CI -0.69, 0.04). CBT interventions showed a significant reduction in physical (SMD -0.79; 95% CI -1.26, -0.33) and psychological (SMD -0.80; 95% CI -1.25, -0.36) but not sexual (SMD -0.35; 95% CI -1.73, 1.03) or any IPV (SMD 0.09; 95% CI -0.05, 0.23). CONCLUSIONS: Both advocacy and CBT interventions reduced physical and psychological IPV but not sexual or any IPV. Limitations include the low number of studies and the heterogeneity of interventions.
Authors: C Christ; M M de Waal; M J Kikkert; D G Fluri; A T F Beekman; J J M Dekker; D J F van Schaik Journal: BMC Psychiatry Date: 2022-06-16 Impact factor: 4.144
Authors: Angela M Parcesepe; Evette Cordoba; John A Gallis; Jennifer Headley; Berenger Tchatchou; John Hembling; Claudian Soffo; Joy Noel Baumgartner Journal: BMC Pregnancy Childbirth Date: 2021-03-04 Impact factor: 3.007