Next Article in Journal
Blood Work: Managing Menstruation, Menopause and Gynaecological Health Conditions in the Workplace
Next Article in Special Issue
Psychological Impact of Pro-Anorexia and Pro-Eating Disorder Websites on Adolescent Females: A Systematic Review
Previous Article in Journal
Comprehensive Risk Assessment of Schistosomiasis Epidemic Based on Precise Identification of Oncomelania hupensis Breeding Grounds—A Case Study of Dongting Lake Area
Previous Article in Special Issue
Responses to Stress: Investigating the Role of Gender, Social Relationships, and Touch Avoidance in Italy
Open AccessArticle

Analysis of Effectiveness of Individual and Group Trauma-Focused Interventions for Female Victims of Intimate Partner Violence

Department Personality, Assessment and Clinical Psychology, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, 28223 Madrid, Spain
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Academic Editor: Maria Catena Silvestri
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18(4), 1952; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18041952
Received: 10 December 2020 / Revised: 2 February 2021 / Accepted: 13 February 2021 / Published: 17 February 2021
Group psychological programs for intimate partner violence (IPV) survivors would seem particularly useful since they contribute to interrupting women’s isolation and have cost-effectiveness advantage. This study aims to analyze whether the effectiveness of group interventions for female survivors of IPV is equivalent to that of the individual format. A cognitive-behavioral trauma-focused intervention program was applied in eight weekly sessions in Madrid (Spain) to IPV female survivors with significant posttraumatic symptoms that were randomly assigned to the individual (n = 25) or group (n = 28) intervention format. Measures of posttraumatic stress (Severity of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Symptoms Scale), depression (Beck Depression Inventory), anxiety (Beck Anxiety Inventory), self-esteem (Rosenberg’s Scale) and social support were analyzed at pre-treatment, post-treatment, and 1-, 3-, 6- and 12-months follow-ups. A total of 28.3% of women dropped out, without significant format differences. Intervention (both formats) had significant improvements with large effect sizes in posttraumatic stress (η2p = 0.56), depression (η2p = 0.45), anxiety (η2p = 0.41) and self-esteem (η2p = 0.26) that maintained in follow-ups (p < 0.001), without significant differences between formats. Both intervention formats had different evolutions for depression and anxiety (p < 0.05), with better effects in the individual format at the first post-test measurements, but the differences tended to disappear over time. Intervention was effective in improving social support, with no significant differences between formats. All in all, both formats showed similar effectiveness. The group format could be an alternative when applying psychological interventions for female IPV survivors, since it would maintain good cost-effectiveness balance, mainly in the long-term. View Full-Text
Keywords: intimate partner violence; psychological treatment; randomized controlled trial; posttraumatic stress; effectiveness intimate partner violence; psychological treatment; randomized controlled trial; posttraumatic stress; effectiveness
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Crespo, M.; Arinero, M.; Soberón, C. Analysis of Effectiveness of Individual and Group Trauma-Focused Interventions for Female Victims of Intimate Partner Violence. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 1952. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18041952

AMA Style

Crespo M, Arinero M, Soberón C. Analysis of Effectiveness of Individual and Group Trauma-Focused Interventions for Female Victims of Intimate Partner Violence. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2021; 18(4):1952. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18041952

Chicago/Turabian Style

Crespo, María; Arinero, María; Soberón, Carmen. 2021. "Analysis of Effectiveness of Individual and Group Trauma-Focused Interventions for Female Victims of Intimate Partner Violence" Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 18, no. 4: 1952. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18041952

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Search more from Scilit
 
Search
Back to TopTop