Smedslund G, Dalsbø T K, Steiro A K, Winsvold A, Clench-Aas J
Norwegian Knowledge Centre for Health Services, PB 7004 St. Olavs Plass, Oslo, N-0130, Norway.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007 Jul 18;2011(3):CD006048. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006048.pub2.
In national surveys between 10 % and 34 % of women have reported being physically assaulted by an intimate male partner. Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) or programmes with elements of CBT are frequently used treatments for physically abusive men. Participants either enroll voluntarily or are obliged to participate in CBT by means of a court order. CBT not only seeks to change behaviour using established behavioural strategies, but also targets the thinking patterns and beliefs that are thought to contribute to violence.
To measure the effects of CBT and similar interventions on men's physical abuse of their female partners.
We searched the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (CENTRAL), C2-SPECTR, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, ERIC, Care Data/Social Care Online, Sociological Abstracts, Criminal Justice Abstracts, Bibliography of Nordic Criminology (all to late 2006), and SIGLE to 2003. Santé mentale au Québec was handsearched from 1976 to 2003 and reference lists of articles. We also contacted field experts and the authors of included studies.
Randomised controlled trials (including cluster-randomised and quasi-randomised trials) of cognitive behavioural therapy with men who physically abuse their partners and reporting effects on continued violence.
Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. We contacted study authors for additional information.
Six trials, all from the USA, involving 2343 people, were included. A meta-analysis of four trials comparing CBT with a no-intervention control with 1771 participants, reported that the relative risk of violence was 0.86 (favouring the intervention group) with a 95% confidence interval (95% CI) of 0.54 to 1.38. This is a small effect size, and the confidence interval is so wide that there is no clear evidence for an effect. One study (Wisconsin Study) compared CBT with process-psychodynamic group treatment and found a relative risk of new violence of 1.07 (95% CI 0.68 to 1.68). Even though the process-psychodynamic treatment did marginally better than CBT, this result is also equivocal. Finally, one small study (N = 64) compared a combined treatment for substance abuse and domestic violence (SADV) with a Twelve-Step Facilitation (TSF) group. An analysis involving 58 participants investigated the effect on reduction in frequency of physical violence episodes. The effect size was 0.30 (favouring TSF) with 95% confidence interval from -0.22 to 0.81.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There are still too few randomised controlled effect evaluations to conclude about the effects of cognitive behaviour therapy on domestic violence.
在全国范围内的调查中,10%至34%的女性报告称曾遭受亲密男性伴侣的身体攻击。认知行为疗法(CBT)或包含CBT要素的项目是针对实施身体虐待行为男性的常用治疗方法。参与者要么自愿报名,要么通过法院命令强制参加CBT。CBT不仅试图运用既定的行为策略改变行为,还针对那些被认为会导致暴力行为的思维模式和信念。
评估CBT及类似干预措施对男性对其女性伴侣实施身体虐待行为的影响。
我们检索了Cochrane对照试验注册库(CENTRAL)、C2 - SPECTR、MEDLINE、EMBASE、CINAHL、PsycINFO、ERIC、Care Data/社会护理在线、社会学文摘、刑事司法文摘、北欧犯罪学文献目录(均截至2006年末)以及截至2003年的SIGLE。对魁北克精神卫生数据库进行了1976年至2003年的手工检索,并查阅了文章的参考文献列表。我们还联系了领域专家和纳入研究的作者。
针对对伴侣实施身体虐待行为的男性进行认知行为疗法的随机对照试验(包括整群随机试验和半随机试验),并报告对持续暴力行为的影响。
两位综述作者独立评估试验质量并提取数据。我们联系研究作者获取更多信息。
纳入了6项试验,均来自美国,涉及2343人。对4项试验进行的荟萃分析比较了CBT与无干预对照组,共1771名参与者,结果显示暴力行为的相对风险为0.86(干预组占优),95%置信区间(95%CI)为0.54至1.38。这是一个较小的效应量,且置信区间很宽,没有明确的证据表明存在效应。一项研究(威斯康星研究)将CBT与过程心理动力团体治疗进行比较,发现新暴力行为的相对风险为1.07(95%CI 0.68至1.68)。尽管过程心理动力治疗比CBT略好,但该结果也不明确。最后,一项小型研究(N = 64)将药物滥用和家庭暴力联合治疗(SADV)与十二步促进法(TSF)团体进行比较。一项涉及58名参与者的分析调查了对减少身体暴力发作频率的影响。效应量为0.30(TSF占优),95%置信区间为 - 0.22至0.81。
关于认知行为疗法对家庭暴力的影响,目前随机对照效应评估的数量仍然太少,无法得出结论。