Can Gür Ganime, Yılmaz Emine
Department of Psychiatric Nursing, Faculty of Health Science, University of Pamukkale, Denizli, Turkey.
Faculty of Nursing, Department of Psychiatric Nursing, University of İnönü, Malatya, Turkey.
Issues Ment Health Nurs. 2023 Mar;44(3):162-175. doi: 10.1080/01612840.2022.2163439. Epub 2023 Feb 1.
The purpose of this study was to undertake a quantitative analysis to determine the effectiveness of interventions designed in reducing different types of stigma (self-stigma, social stigma, and structural stigma) for the substance use. This study followed the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions guideline. This study followed the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions guideline. Systematic searches were conducted in PubMed, Science Direct, Web of Science, Scopus, and MEDLINE. These electronic databases were searched research published in English from date of their inception to July 15, 2021. Randomized controlled trials that evaluated interventions on stigma associated with substance use were included. Studies should include at least one stigma outcome involving self-stigma, social stigma, or structural stigmatization. Ten randomized controlled studies were included. The overall Hedges'g for the interventions' impact on reducing stigma was 0.301, 95%CI = [-0.154- 0.755], p = 0.195, that there was no statistically significant difference. However, the meta-analysis showed that interventions had no significant impact on self-stigma [0.682, 95% CI=(-0.015-1.380), p = 0.055] and social stigma [0.198, 95% CI=(-1.271-0.876), p = 0.718] but had a small but significant impact in favor of the experimental group on reducing structural stigma [0.360 (95% CI= 0.156-0.564), p = 0.00]. According to subgroup analyses, there was no difference in the effects of stigma according to the type of intervention, the number of sessions, or the type of group. The interventions for reducing stigma related to substance use are promising. It seems to have a small but significant positive impact on structural stigma.
本研究的目的是进行定量分析，以确定所设计的干预措施在减少物质使用方面不同类型的污名（自我污名、社会污名和结构性污名）方面的有效性。本研究遵循《Cochrane干预措施系统评价手册》指南。系统检索了PubMed、Science Direct、Web of Science、Scopus和MEDLINE。在这些电子数据库中检索了从创建之日至2021年7月15日以英文发表的研究。纳入了评估与物质使用相关污名干预措施的随机对照试验。研究应包括至少一项涉及自我污名、社会污名或结构性污名化的污名结果。纳入了十项随机对照研究。干预措施对减少污名影响的总体Hedges'g为0.301，95%CI = [-0.154 - 0.755]，p = 0.195，即无统计学显著差异。然而，荟萃分析表明，干预措施对自我污名[0.682，95%CI = (-0.015 - 1.380)，p = 0.055]和社会污名[0.198，95%CI = (-1.271 - 0.876)，p = 0.718]没有显著影响，但在减少结构性污名方面对实验组有微小但显著的影响[0.360(95%CI = 0.156 - 0.564)，p = 0.00]。根据亚组分析，根据干预类型、疗程数或组的类型，污名影响没有差异。减少与物质使用相关污名的干预措施很有前景。它似乎对结构性污名有微小但显著的积极影响。
