A systematic review of evidence-based psychological interventions and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people

ABSTRACT

Objective

Limited empirical literature exists examining the application of evidenced-based psychotherapies when working with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. Further, Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people’s view of Social and Emotional Wellbeing (SEWB) differs to Western ideologies of mental health. In the present study, a qualitative systematic review explored evidenced-based psychological therapies with Indigenous clients.

Method

A systematic review was conducted using the PRISMA framework. A total of 12 articles that met criteria for inclusion in the review were extracted through hand- and database searching. Therapies identified in the articles included Narrative Therapy (NT), Cognitive-Behaviour Therapy (CBT), Acceptance-based Therapies (ACT) and Multisystemic Therapy (MST).

Results

CBT was the most commonly reported therapy in the review. Three articles, rated lower in quality, also identified NT. Although limited in quantity, acceptance-based and strength-based therapies and MST were also identified as having cross-cultural applications.

Conclusions

While, CBT, ACT and MST have been used when working at the cultural interface with Indigenous people, further empirical evidence with outcome data is required. Such evidence is required to assess acceptability and suitability of such psychotherapies and for clinicians to provide culturally responsive practice when working with Indigenous people.

KEY POINTS

(1) Indigenous SEWB differs from Western mental health conceptualisations.

(2) A cross-cultural interface was found in CBT, ACT, NT and MST.

(3) Further empirical testing of psychotherapy interventions with Indigenous clients to confirm cultural acceptability, suitability and efficacy.

KEYWORDS:

• Aboriginal
• evidence-based
• Torres Strait Islander
• psychotherapy
• efficacy
• SEWB

Acknowledgments

The systematic review was not funded by any grants or organisations.

Disclosure Statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).