The efficacy of cognitive behavioural therapy and advocacy interventions for women who have experienced intimate partner violence: A systematic review and meta-analysis

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.

Key words::

• Advocacy
• cognitive behavioural therapy
• intimate partner violence
• meta-analysis
• systematic review
• women

Acknowledgements

This work is supported by grants: RD12/0028/009 from Fondo de Investigaciones Sanitarias, Instituto Carlos III-FEDER and INT 12/318. All authors contributed equally to this work. All authors critically reviewed the manuscript and were involved in the interpretation of data.

Declaration of interest: All the authors declare that there is no potential conflict of interest.