Evaluation of an intervention to improve Primary Health Care's response to cases of domestic violence against women - São Paulo, Brazil. / Avaliação de intervenção para aprimorar a resposta da Atenção Primária à Saúde ao cuidado de casos de violência doméstica contra a mulher - São Paulo, Brasil.

The aim was to analyse and improve the Primary Health Care (PHC) response to domestic violence against women (DVAW) by developing, implementing and evaluating an intervention. A pilot study evaluating the before and after of intervention implementation, using mixed methods and carried out in three phases - formative, intervention and evaluation - between August 2017 and March 2019 in two Basic Health Units (UBS) in the city of São Paulo. In this paper, we present the details and evaluation of the intervention, carried out six to twelve months after its implementation. The intervention was developed based on the findings of the formative phase and in line with the health policy that establishes the Violence Prevention Nucleus (NPV) and consisted of stablishing a care pathway; general training for all workers and specific training for the NPV; drawing up educational material and monthly case discussions over 6 months. The evaluation showed acceptability among the workers, increased identification and repertoire for caring for cases of DVAW, strengthening internal referral and the intersectoral network. We identified obstacles to the full implementation and sustainability of the intervention.

O objetivo foi analisar e aprimorar a resposta da Atenção Primária à Saúde (APS) ao cuidado dos casos de violência doméstica contra a mulher (VDCM), desenvolvendo, implementando e avaliando uma intervenção. Pesquisa piloto de avaliação do antes e depois da implementação de uma intervenção, utilizando métodos mistos e realizada em três fases - linha de base, intervenção e avaliação - entre agosto/2017 e março/2019 em duas Unidades Básicas de Saúde (UBS) do Município de São Paulo. Apresentamos neste artigo o detalhamento e a avaliação da intervenção, realizada 6-12 meses após implementação. A intervenção foi desenvolvida com base nos achados da primeira fase e em consonância com a política de saúde que estabelece os Núcleos de Prevenção à Violência (NPV), consistindo em: elaboração de fluxo assistencial; capacitação geral para todos os trabalhadores e específica para o NPV; elaboração de material educativo e discussões mensais de caso durante 6 meses. A avaliação mostrou aceitabilidade entre os trabalhadores, aumentou a identificação e repertório para o cuidado dos casos de VDCM, fortalecendo o encaminhamento interno e à rede intersetorial. Identificamos obstáculos para plena implementação e sustentabilidade da intervenção.

Moving beyond the 'PPG': co-production and inclusion health.

BACKGROUND: We frequently fail to meaningfully incorporate patient voice in the development of health services, in particular the voices of those who are most disadvantaged. AIM: To share learning from a co-production project to improve primary care experience for those with multiple disadvantage and lived experience of trauma. METHOD: We formed a collective of women (Bridging Gaps). Group members had lived experience of poverty, mental health challenges, addictions, homelessness, and sexual exploitation. Other members were researchers, GPs, and members of a third-sector organisation. We worked alongside local GPs to change how services were delivered. We collected interviews (n = 9), ethnographic data from group meetings (n = 3), and reflective notes from group members (n = 19). Data on our process were analysed using a framework approach drawn from the principles of trauma-informed care. RESULTS: We highlight the challenges for those with multiple disadvantages and trauma experience to meaningfully and safely engage in traditional Patient Participation Group (PPG) models. True co-production of services requires adequate resources and close collaborative working with local community organisations. Groups must be facilitated by those with relevant experience and the ability to both notice and manage power dynamics within the room. With sufficient support, co-production models have potential to empower group participants and improve health services. CONCLUSION: Partnership working between GPs, the third sector, and other organisations is vital. This can allow GPs to benefit from the expertise of those with relevant lived experience in tackling health inequalities.

Comparing health systems readiness for integrating domestic violence services in Brazil, occupied Palestinian Territories, Nepal and Sri Lanka.

Domestic violence (DV) is a global prevalent health problem leading to adverse health consequences, yet health systems are often unprepared to address it. This article presents a comparative synthesis of the health system's pre-conditions necessary to enable integration of DV in health services in Brazil, Nepal, Sri Lanka and occupied Palestinian Territories (oPT). A cross-country, comparative analysis was conducted using a health systems readiness framework. Data collection involved multiple data sources, including qualitative interviews with various stakeholders; focus-group discussions with women; structured facility observations; and a survey with providers. Our findings highlight deficiencies in policy and practice that need to be addressed for an effective DV response. Common readiness gaps include unclear and limited guidance on DV, unsupportive leadership coupled with limited training and resources. Most providers felt unprepared, lacked guidance and felt unsupported and unprotected by managers and their health system. While in Brazil most providers felt they should respond to DV cases, many in Sri Lanka preferred not to. Such organizational and service delivery challenges, in turn, also affected how health providers responded to DV cases leaving them not confident, uncertain about their knowledge and unsure about their role. Furthermore, providers' personal beliefs and values on DV and gender norms also impacted their motivation and ability to respond, prompting some to become 'activists' while others were reluctant to intervene and prone to blame women. Our synthesis also pointed to a gap in women's use of health services for DV as they had low trust in providers. Our conceptual framework demonstrates the importance of having clear policies and highlights the need to engage leadership across every level of the system to reframe challenges and strengthen routine practices. Future research should also determine the ways in which women's understanding and needs related to DV help-seeking are addressed.

Trends in outcomes used to measure the effectiveness of UK-based support interventions and services targeted at adults with experience of domestic and sexual violence and abuse: a scoping review.

OBJECTIVES: In the UK, a range of support services and interventions are available to people who have experienced or perpetrated domestic and sexual violence and abuse (DSVA). However, it is currently not clear which outcomes and outcome measures are used to assess their effectiveness. The objective of this review is to summarise, map and identify trends in outcome measures in evaluations of DSVA services and interventions in the UK. DESIGN: Scoping review. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Social Policy and Practice, ASSIA, IBSS, Sociological abstracts and SSCI electronic databases were searched from inception until 21 June 2022. Grey literature sources were identified and searched. ELIGIBILITY: We included randomised controlled trials, non-randomised comparative studies, pre-post studies and service evaluations, with at least one outcome relating to the effectiveness of the support intervention or service for people who have experienced and/or perpetrated DSVA. Outcomes had to be assessed at baseline and at least one more time point, or compared with a comparison group. CHARTING METHODS: Outcome measures were extracted, iteratively thematically grouped into categories, domains and subdomains, and trends were explored. RESULTS: 80 studies reporting 87 DSVA interventions or services were included. A total of 426 outcome measures were extracted, of which 200 were used more than once. The most commonly reported outcome subdomain was DSVA perpetration. Cessation of abuse according to the Severity of Abuse Grid was the most common individual outcome. Analysis of temporal trends showed that the number of studies and outcomes used has increased since the 1990s. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings highlight inconsistencies between studies in outcome measurement. The increase in the number of studies and variety of measures suggests that as evaluation of DSVA services and interventions matures, there is an increased need for a core of common, reliable metrics to aid comparability. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: https://osf.io/frh2e.

Randomised pilot and feasibility trial of a group intervention for men who perpetrate intimate partner violence against women.

BACKGROUND: There is a need for robust evidence on the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of domestic abuse perpetrator programmes in reducing abusive behaviour and improving wellbeing for victim/survivors. While any randomised controlled trial can present difficulties in terms of recruitment and retention, conducting such a trial with domestic abuse perpetrators is particularly challenging. This paper reports the pilot and feasibility trial of a voluntary domestic abuse perpetrator group programme in the United Kingdom. METHODS: This was a pragmatic individually randomised pilot and feasibility trial with an integrated qualitative study in one site (covering three local-authority areas) in England. Male perpetrators were randomised to either the intervention or usual care. The intervention was a 23-week group programme for male perpetrators in heterosexual relationships, with an average of three one-to-one sessions, and one-to-one support for female current- or ex-partners delivered by third sector organisations. There was no active control treatment for men, and partners of control men were signposted towards domestic abuse support services. Data were collected at three-monthly intervals for nine months from male and female participants. The main objectives assessed were recruitment, randomisation, retention, data completeness, fidelity to the intervention model, and acceptability of the trial design. RESULTS: This study recruited 36 men (22 randomly allocated to attend the intervention group programme, 14 to usual care), and 15 current- or ex-partners (39% of eligible partners). Retention and completeness of data were high: 67% of male (24/36), and 80% (12/15) of female participants completed the self-reported questionnaire at nine months. A framework for assessing fidelity to the intervention was developed. In interviews, men who completed all or most of the intervention gave positive feedback and reported changes in their own behaviour. Partners were also largely supportive of the trial and were positive about the intervention. Participants who were not allocated to the intervention group reported feeling disappointed but understood the rationale for the trial. CONCLUSIONS: It was feasible to recruit, randomise and retain male perpetrators and female victim/survivors of abuse and collect self-reported outcome data. Participants were engaged in the intervention and reported positive benefits. The trial design was seen as acceptable. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN71797549, submitted 03/08/2017, retrospectively registered 27/05/2022.

Improving access to general practice for and with people with severe and multiple disadvantage: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: People with severe and multiple disadvantage (SMD) who experience combinations of homelessness, substance misuse, violence, abuse, and poor mental health have high health needs and poor access to primary care. AIM: To improve access to general practice for people with SMD by facilitating collaborative service improvement meetings between healthcare staff, people with lived experience of SMD, and those who support them; participants were then interviewed about this work. DESIGN AND SETTING: The Bridging Gaps group is a collaboration between healthcare staff, researchers, women with lived experience of SMD, and a charity that supports them in a UK city. A project was co-produced by the Bridging Gaps group to improve access to general practice for people with SMD, which was further developed with three inner-city general practices. METHOD: Nine service improvement meetings were facilitated at three general practices, and six of these were formally observed. Nine practice staff and four women with lived experience of SMD were interviewed. Three women with lived experience of SMD and one staff member who supports them participated in a focus group. Data were analysed inductively and deductively using thematic analysis. RESULTS: By providing time and funding opportunities to motivated general practice staff and involving participants with lived experience of SMD, service changes were made in an effort to improve access for people with SMD. These included prioritising patients on an inclusion patient list with more flexible access, providing continuity for patients via a care coordinator and micro-team of clinicians, and developing an information-sharing document. The process and outcomes improved connections within and between general practices, support organisations, and people with SMD. CONCLUSION: The co-designed strategies described in this study could be adapted locally and evaluated in other areas. Investing in this focused way of working may improve accessibility to health care, health equity, and staff wellbeing.

Harmonising outcome measurement for child focused domestic abuse interventions. Reflections on the development and implementation of a core outcome set.

There is appetite in the UK to better measure the impact of domestic violence and abuse (DVA) interventions on children. The spread of outcomes-based commissioning means outcome measurement is no longer just the territory of academic researchers but is now firmly within the purview of practitioners and policy makers. However, outcomes measured in trials only partially represent the views of those delivering and using services with respect to how success should be defined and captured. Even within trials there is huge inconsistency in the definition and measurement of important endpoints. This yields a body of evidence that is difficult to make sense of, defeating the ends for which it was produced - to improve the response to children and families who have experienced abuse. Development of Core Outcome Sets (COS) is seen as a solution to this problem, by establishing consensus across key stakeholder groups regarding a minimum standard for outcome measurement in trials, and increasingly in service delivery contexts. To date COS development has addressed outcomes relating to health conditions or interventions, with limited application to public health challenges. We reflect on our efforts to develop a COS to evaluate psychosocial interventions for children and families experiencing DVA. We highlight the value of COS development as a mechanism for improving evidence quality and the response to families experiencing abuse. Finally, we make recommendations to researchers and COS guideline developers to support this broader application of COS methodology.

Primary care system-level training and support programme for the secondary prevention of domestic violence and abuse: a cost-effectiveness feasibility model.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to evaluate the prospective cost-effectiveness of the Identification and Referral to Improve Safety plus (IRIS+) intervention compared with usual care using feasibility data derived from seven UK general practice sites. METHOD: A cost-utility analysis was conducted to assess the potential cost-effectiveness of IRIS+, an enhanced model of the UK's usual care. IRIS+ assisted primary care staff in identifying, documenting and referring not only women, but also men and children who may have experienced domestic violence/abuse as victims, perpetrators or both. A perpetrator group programme was not part of the intervention per se but was linked to the IRIS+ intervention via a referral pathway and signposting. A Markov model was constructed from a societal perspective to estimate mean incremental costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) of IRIS+ compared with to usual care over a 10-year time horizon. RESULTS: The IRIS+ intervention saved £92 per patient and produced QALY gains of 0.003. The incremental net monetary benefit was positive (£145) and the IRIS+ intervention was cost-effective in 55% of simulations at a cost-effectiveness threshold of £20 000 per QALY. CONCLUSION: The IRIS+ intervention could be cost-effective or even cost saving from a societal perspective in the UK, though there are large uncertainties, reflected in the confidence intervals and simulation results.

Feasibility of a reconfigured domestic violence and abuse training and support intervention responding to affected women, men, children and young people through primary care.

BACKGROUND: Identification in UK general practice of women affected by domestic violence and abuse (DVA) is increasing, but men and children/young people (CYP) are rarely identified and referred for specialist support. To address this gap, we collaborated with IRISi (UK social enterprise) to strengthen elements of the IRIS + intervention which included the identification of men, direct engagement with CYP, and improved guidance on responding to information received from other agencies. IRIS + was an adaptation of the national IRIS (Identification and Referral to Improve Safety) model focused on the needs of women victim-survivors of DVA. Without diminishing the responses to women, IRIS + also responded to the needs of men experiencing or perpetrating DVA, and CYP living with DVA and/or experiencing it in their own relationships. Our study tested the feasibility of the adapted IRIS + intervention in England and Wales between 2019-21. METHODS: We used mixed method analysis to triangulate data from various sources (pre/post intervention questionnaires with primary care clinicians; data extracted from medical records and DVA agencies; semi-structured interviews with clinicians, service providers and referred adults and children) to assess the feasibility and acceptability of the IRIS + intervention. RESULTS: The rate of referral for women doubled (21.6/year/practice) from the rate (9.29/year/practice) in the original IRIS trial. The intervention also enabled identification and direct referral of CYP (15% of total referrals) and men (mostly survivors, 10% of total referrals). Despite an increase in self-reported clinician preparedness to respond to all patient groups, the intervention generated a low number of men perpetrator referrals (2% of all referrals). GPs were the principal patient referrers. Over two-thirds of referred women and CYP and almost half of all referred men were directly supported by the service. Many CYP also received IRIS + support indirectly, via the referred parents. Men and CYP supported by IRIS + reported improved physical and mental health, wellbeing, and confidence. CONCLUSIONS: Although the study showed acceptability and feasibility, there remains uncertainty about the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and scalability of IRIS + . Building on the success of this feasibility study, the next step should be trialling the effectiveness of IRIS + implementation to inform service implementation decisions.

Avaliação de intervenção para aprimorar a resposta da Atenção Primária à Saúde ao cuidado de casos de violência doméstica contra a mulher - São Paulo, Brasil / Evaluation of an intervention to improve Primary Health Care's response to cases of domestic violence against women - São Paulo, Brazil

Resumo O objetivo foi analisar e aprimorar a resposta da Atenção Primária à Saúde (APS) ao cuidado dos casos de violência doméstica contra a mulher (VDCM), desenvolvendo, implementando e avaliando uma intervenção. Pesquisa piloto de avaliação do antes e depois da implementação de uma intervenção, utilizando métodos mistos e realizada em três fases - linha de base, intervenção e avaliação - entre agosto/2017 e março/2019 em duas Unidades Básicas de Saúde (UBS) do Município de São Paulo. Apresentamos neste artigo o detalhamento e a avaliação da intervenção, realizada 6-12 meses após implementação. A intervenção foi desenvolvida com base nos achados da primeira fase e em consonância com a política de saúde que estabelece os Núcleos de Prevenção à Violência (NPV), consistindo em: elaboração de fluxo assistencial; capacitação geral para todos os trabalhadores e específica para o NPV; elaboração de material educativo e discussões mensais de caso durante 6 meses. A avaliação mostrou aceitabilidade entre os trabalhadores, aumentou a identificação e repertório para o cuidado dos casos de VDCM, fortalecendo o encaminhamento interno e à rede intersetorial. Identificamos obstáculos para plena implementação e sustentabilidade da intervenção.

Abstract The aim was to analyse and improve the Primary Health Care (PHC) response to domestic violence against women (DVAW) by developing, implementing and evaluating an intervention. A pilot study evaluating the before and after of intervention implementation, using mixed methods and carried out in three phases - formative, intervention and evaluation - between August 2017 and March 2019 in two Basic Health Units (UBS) in the city of São Paulo. In this paper, we present the details and evaluation of the intervention, carried out six to twelve months after its implementation. The intervention was developed based on the findings of the formative phase and in line with the health policy that establishes the Violence Prevention Nucleus (NPV) and consisted of stablishing a care pathway; general training for all workers and specific training for the NPV; drawing up educational material and monthly case discussions over 6 months. The evaluation showed acceptability among the workers, increased identification and repertoire for caring for cases of DVAW, strengthening internal referral and the intersectoral network. We identified obstacles to the full implementation and sustainability of the intervention.

Child maltreatment and parental domestic violence and abuse, co-occurrence and the effect on lifetime outcomes in the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC).

Exposure to child maltreatment (CM), and parental domestic violence and abuse (DVA), impose considerable adverse life outcomes in both the short and long term, yet, the extent and effects of their co-occurrence on outcomes have not been comprehensively quantified. This study describes the analysis of data from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children, quantifying the prevalence of CM, parental DVA, co-occurrence rates, and the impact of different combinations of childhood exposures on life outcomes (health, economic, and likelihood of perpetrating intimate partner violence as a young person). Childhood exposure prevalences were estimated at 41.7% for any form of CM, 19.3% for parental DVA, and 49.0% for exposure to at least one form of CM and/or parental DVA. Co-occurring parental DVA was reported in 21%-42% of CM-exposed households. Sexual abuse was reported in 2% of parental DVA-exposed households, whilst co-occurrence of other forms of CM ranged between 19% and 41%. Co-occurring CM and parental DVA exposures were associated with increased risks of drug use, anxiety, depression, smoking, unemployment, social welfare use, and perpetration of intimate partner violence as a young person - highlighting the intergenerational effects of exposure. Increased risks across a wider range of adverse outcomes were associated with child-reported awareness of parental DVA, compared to parent-reported DVA exposure. The high cumulative prevalence of childhood exposure to CM and/or parental DVA, and the scale of the resulting adverse impacts emphasise the need for policies and family interventions sensitive to the possibility of co-occurring forms of abuse.

Improving access to general practice for people with severe and multiple disadvantage: a realist review protocol (The Connection Study).

Introduction: Despite having high unmet health need, people with severe and multiple disadvantage (SMD, including combinations of homelessness, substance misuse, poor mental health and domestic violence and abuse) have poor access to general practice. This realist review will examine the existing evidence on interventions or aspects of routine care in general practice that are likely to increase or decrease access to general practice for people with SMD. Methods and analysis: he aim of this review is to identify how these interventions or aspects of routine care increase or decrease access to general practice for people with SMD, in which contexts and for which patients. This review will involve a process comprising five sequential phases: (1) identifying established theories, (2) conducting an extensive search for proof, (3) selecting appropriate articles, (4) gathering and organising relevant data, and (5) utilising a realist analytical approach to synthesise evidence and make conclusions. Local implementation documents, in addition to published research studies, will be incorporated to enrich the analysis. We will collaborate with a stakeholder group consisting of people with lived experience of SMD and those who support them to advise us throughout. Ethics and dissemination: Ethical approval is not required. Our findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications, conference presentations and lay summaries and will be used to develop a complex intervention for improving access to general practice for and with people with severe and multiple disadvantage. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42023390495.

How effective are UK-based support interventions and services targeted at adults who have experienced domestic and sexual violence and abuse at improving their safety and wellbeing? A systematic review protocol.

BACKGROUND: Domestic and sexual violence and abuse (DSVA) is prevalent in the UK, with wide-ranging impacts both on individuals and society. However, to date, there has been no systematic synthesis of the evidence for the effectiveness of UK-based support interventions and services for victim-survivors of DSVA. This review will aim to systematically collate, synthesise and quality assess the evidence regarding the effectiveness of UK support interventions and services targeted at those who have experienced DSVA. The review will use findings of a preliminary scoping review, as well as input from stakeholders representing domestic and sexual violence third sector organisations to identify and prioritise the most relevant outcomes to focus on. METHODS: We will undertake a systematic search for peer-reviewed literature in MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Social Policy and Practice, Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts (ASSIA), International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS), Sociological abstracts and SSCI. Grey literature will be identified by searching grey literature databases, circulating a call for evidence to local and national DSVA charities and organisations, and targeted website searching. Two reviewers will independently perform study selection and quality appraisal, with data extraction undertaken by one reviewer and checked for accuracy by a second reviewer. Narrative synthesis will be conducted, with meta-analysis if possible. DISCUSSION: Existing individual studies and evaluations have reported positive impacts of support interventions and services for those who have experienced DSVA. Thus, it is expected that this review and synthesis will provide robust and conclusive evidence of these effects. It will also allow comparisons to be made between different types of support interventions and services, to inform policy makers and funders regarding the most effective ways of reducing domestic and sexual violence and abuse and its impacts.

Protocol for a randomised controlled trial of a healthy relationship tool for men who use intimate partner violence (BETTER MAN).

BACKGROUND: Intimate partner violence (IPV) is common globally, but there is a lack of research on how to intervene early with men who might be using IPV. Building on evidence supporting the benefits of online interventions for women victim/survivors, this study aims to test whether a healthy relationship website (BETTER MAN) is effective at improving men's help seeking, their recognition of behaviours as IPV and their readiness to change their behaviours. METHODS/DESIGN: In this two-group, pragmatic randomised controlled trial, men aged 18-50 years residing in Australia who have been in an adult intimate relationship (female, male or non-binary partner) in the past 12 months are eligible. Men who report being worried about their behaviour or have had others express concerns about their behaviour towards a partner in the past 12 months will be randomised with a 1:1 allocation ratio to receive the BETTER MAN website or a comparator website (basic healthy relationships information). The BETTER MAN intervention includes self-directed, interactive reflection activities spread across three modules: Better Relationships, Better Values and Better Communication, with a final "action plan" of strategies and resources. Using an intention to treat approach, the primary analysis will estimate between-group difference in the proportion of men who report undertaking help-seeking behaviours for relationship issues in the last 6 months, at 6 months post-baseline. Analysis of secondary outcomes will estimate between-group differences in: (i) mean score of awareness of behaviours in relationships as abusive immediately post-use of website; (ii) mean score on readiness to change immediately post-use of website and 3 months after baseline; and (iii) cost-effectiveness. DISCUSSION: This trial will evaluate the effectiveness of an online healthy relationship tool for men who may use IPV. BETTER MAN could be incorporated into practice in community and health settings, providing an evidence-informed website to assist men to seek help to promote healthy relationships and reduce use of IPV. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN12622000786796 with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: 2 June 2022. Version: 1 (28 September 2023).

Psychosocial interventions for survivors of rape and sexual assault experienced during adulthood.

BACKGROUND: Exposure to rape, sexual assault and sexual abuse has lifelong impacts for mental health and well-being. Prolonged Exposure (PE), Cognitive Processing Therapy (CPT) and Eye Movement Desensitisation and Reprocessing (EMDR) are among the most common interventions offered to survivors to alleviate post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and other psychological impacts. Beyond such trauma-focused cognitive and behavioural approaches, there is a range of low-intensity interventions along with new and emerging non-exposure based approaches (trauma-sensitive yoga, Reconsolidation of Traumatic Memories and Lifespan Integration). This review presents a timely assessment of international evidence on any type of psychosocial intervention offered to individuals who experienced rape, sexual assault or sexual abuse as adults. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of psychosocial interventions on mental health and well-being for survivors of rape, sexual assault or sexual abuse experienced during adulthood. SEARCH METHODS: In January 2022, we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, 12 other databases and three trials registers. We also checked reference lists of included studies, contacted authors and experts, and ran forward citation searches. SELECTION CRITERIA: Any study that allocated individuals or clusters of individuals by a random or quasi-random method to a psychosocial intervention that promoted recovery and healing following exposure to rape, sexual assault or sexual abuse in those aged 18 years and above compared with no or minimal intervention, usual care, wait-list, pharmacological only or active comparison(s). We classified psychosocial interventions according to Cochrane Common Mental Disorders Group's psychological therapies list. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. MAIN RESULTS: We included 36 studies (1991 to 2021) with 3992 participants randomly assigned to 60 experimental groups (3014; 76%) and 23 inactive comparator conditions (978, 24%). The experimental groups consisted of: 32 Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT); 10 behavioural interventions; three integrative therapies; three humanist; five other psychologically oriented interventions; and seven other psychosocial interventions. Delivery involved 1 to 20 (median 11) sessions of traditional face-to-face (41) or other individual formats (four); groups (nine); or involved computer-only interaction (six). Most studies were conducted in the USA (n = 26); two were from South Africa; two from the Democratic Republic of the Congo; with single studies from Australia, Canada, the Netherlands, Spain, Sweden and the UK. Five studies did not disclose a funding source, and all disclosed sources were public funding. Participants were invited from a range of settings: from the community, through the media, from universities and in places where people might seek help for their mental health (e.g. war veterans), in the aftermath of sexual trauma (sexual assault centres and emergency departments) or for problems that accompany the experience of sexual violence (e.g. sexual health/primary care clinics). Participants randomised were 99% women (3965 participants) with just 27 men. Half were Black, African or African-American (1889 participants); 40% White/Caucasian (1530 participants); and 10% represented a range of other ethnic backgrounds (396 participants). The weighted mean age was 35.9 years (standard deviation (SD) 9.6). Eighty-two per cent had experienced rape or sexual assault in adulthood (3260/3992). Twenty-two studies (61%) required fulfilling a measured PTSD diagnostic threshold for inclusion; however, 94% of participants (2239/2370) were reported as having clinically relevant PTSD symptoms at entry. The comparison of psychosocial interventions with inactive controls detected that there may be a beneficial effect at post-treatment favouring psychosocial interventions in reducing PTSD (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.22 to -0.44; 16 studies, 1130 participants; low-certainty evidence; large effect size based on Cohen's D); and depression (SMD -0.82, 95% CI -1.17 to -0.48; 12 studies, 901 participants; low-certainty evidence; large effect size). Psychosocial interventions, however, may not increase the risk of dropout from treatment compared to controls, with a risk ratio of 0.85 (95% CI 0.51 to 1.44; 5 studies, 242 participants; low-certainty evidence). Seven of the 23 studies (with 801 participants) comparing a psychosocial intervention to an inactive control reported on adverse events, with 21 events indicated. Psychosocial interventions may not increase the risk of adverse events compared to controls, with a risk ratio of 1.92 (95% CI 0.30 to 12.41; 6 studies; 622 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We conducted an assessment of risk of bias using the RoB 2 tool on a total of 49 reported results. A high risk of bias affected 43% of PTSD results; 59% for depression symptoms; 40% for treatment dropout; and one-third for adverse events. The greatest sources of bias were problems with randomisation and missing outcome data. Heterogeneity was also high, ranging from I2 = 30% (adverse events) to I2 = 87% (PTSD). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Our review suggests that survivors of rape, sexual violence and sexual abuse during adulthood may experience a large reduction in post-treatment PTSD symptoms and depressive symptoms after experiencing a psychosocial intervention, relative to comparison groups. Psychosocial interventions do not seem to increase dropout from treatment or adverse events/effects compared to controls. However, the number of dropouts and study attrition were generally high, potentially missing harms of exposure to interventions and/or research participation. Also, the differential effects of specific intervention types needs further investigation. We conclude that a range of behavioural and CBT-based interventions may improve the mental health of survivors of rape, sexual assault and sexual abuse in the short term. Therefore, the needs and preferences of individuals must be considered in selecting suitable approaches to therapy and support. The primary outcome in this review focused on the post-treatment period and the question about whether benefits are sustained over time persists. However, attaining such evidence from studies that lack an active comparison may be impractical and even unethical. Thus, we suggest that studies undertake head-to-head comparisons of different intervention types; in particular, of novel, emerging therapies, with one-year plus follow-up periods. Additionally, researchers should focus on the therapeutic benefits and costs for subpopulations such as male survivors and those living with complex PTSD.

The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a group domestic abuse perpetrator programme: protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: In contrast to evidence for interventions supporting victim/survivors of domestic violence and abuse (DVA), the effectiveness of perpetrator programmes for reduction of abuse is uncertain. This study aims to estimate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a perpetrator programme for men. METHODS: Pragmatic two-group individually randomised controlled trial (RCT) with embedded process and economic evaluation. Five centres in southwest England and South Wales aim to recruit 316 (reduced from original target of 366) male domestic abuse perpetrators. These will be randomised 2:1 to a community-based domestic abuse perpetrator programme (DAPP) or usual care comparator with 12-month follow-up. Female partners/ex-partners will be invited to join the study. The intervention for men comprises 23 weekly sessions of a group programme delivered in voluntary sector domestic abuse services. The intervention for female partners/ex-partners is one-to-one support from a safety worker. Men allocated to usual care receive no intervention; however, they are free to access other services. Their partners/ex-partners will be signposted to support services. Data is collected at baseline, and 4, 8 and 12 months' follow-up. The primary outcome is men's self-reported abusive behaviour measured by the Abusive Behaviour Inventory (ABI-29) at 12 months. Secondary measures include physical and mental health status and resource use alongside the abuse measure ABI (ABI-R) for partners/ex-partners and criminal justice contact for men. A mixed methods process evaluation and qualitative study will explore mechanisms of effectiveness, judge fidelity to the intervention model using interviews and group observations. The economic evaluation, over a 1-year time horizon from three perspectives (health and social care, public sector and society), will employ a cost-consequences framework reporting costs alongside economic outcomes (Quality-Adjusted Life Years derived from EQ-5D-5L, SF-12 and CHU-9D, and ICECAP-A) as well as the primary and other secondary outcomes. DISCUSSION: This trial will provide evidence of the (cost)effectiveness of a DAPP. The embedded process evaluation will further insights in the experiences and contexts of participants and their journey through a perpetrator programme, and the study will seek to address the omission in other studies of economic evaluations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN15804282, April 1, 2019.

General practice as a place to receive help for domestic abuse during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative interview study in England and Wales.

BACKGROUND: General practice is an important place for patients experiencing or perpetrating domestic violence and abuse (DVA), and for their children to seek and receive help. While the incidence of DVA may have increased during the COVID- 19 pandemic, there has been a reduction in DVA identifications and referrals to specialist services from general practice. Concurrently there has been the imposition of lockdown measures and a shift to remote care in general practices in the UK. AIM: To understand the patient perspective of seeking and receiving help for DVA in general practice during the COVID-19 pandemic. This was then compared with experiences of general practice healthcare professionals. DESIGN AND SETTING: A qualitative interview study in seven urban general practices in England and Wales, as part of a feasibility study of IRIS+, an integrated primary care DVA system-level training and support intervention. METHOD: Semi-structured interviews with 21 patients affected by DVA and 13 general practice healthcare professionals who had received IRIS+ training. Analysis involved a Framework approach. RESULTS: Patients recounted positive experiences of seeking help for DVA in general practice during the pandemic. However, there have been perceived problems with the availability of general practice and a strong preference for face-to-face consultations, over remote consultations, for the opportunities of non- verbal communication. There were also concerns from healthcare professionals regarding the invisibility of children affected by DVA. CONCLUSION: Perspectives of patients and their families affected by DVA should be prioritised in general practice service planning, including during periods of transition and change.

An evidence-based primary health care intervention to address domestic violence against women in Brazil: a mixed method evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Health systems have a critical role in a multi-sectoral response to domestic violence against women (DVAW). However, the evidence on interventions is skewed towards high income countries, and evidence based interventions are not easily transferred to low-and middle-income countries (LMIC) where significant social, cultural and economic differences exist. We evaluated feasibility and acceptability of implementation of an intervention (HERA-Healthcare Responding to Violence and Abuse) to improve the response to DVAW in two primary health care clinics (PHC) in Brazil. METHODS: The study design is a mixed method process and outcome evaluation, based on training attendance records, semi-structured interviews (with 13 Primary Health Care (PHC) providers, two clinic directors and two women who disclosed domestic violence), and identification and referral data from the Brazilian Epidemiological Surveillance System (SINAN). RESULTS: HERA was feasible and acceptable to women and PHC providers, increased providers' readiness to identify DVAW and diversified referrals outside the health system. The training enhanced the confidence and skills of PHC providers to ask directly about violence and respond to women's disclosures using a women centred, gender and human rights perspective. PHC providers felt safe and supported when dealing with DVAW because HERA emphasised clear roles and collective action within the clinical team. A number of challenges affected implementation including: differential managerial support for the Núcleo de Prevenção da Violência (Violence Prevention Nucleus-NPV) relating to the allocation of resources, monitoring progress and giving feedback; a lack of higher level institutional endorsement prioritising DVAW work; staff turnover; a lack of feedback from external support services to PHC clinics regarding DVAW cases; and inconsistent practices regarding documentation of DVAW. CONCLUSION: Training should be accompanied by system-wide institutional change including active (as opposed to passive) management support, allocation of resources to support roles within the NPV, locally adapted protocols and guidelines, monitoring progress and feedback. Communication and coordination with external support services and documentation systems are crucial and need improvement. DVAW should be prioritised within leadership and governance structures, for example, by including DVAW work as a specific commissioning goal.

Trauma-specific mindfulness-based cognitive therapy for women with post-traumatic stress disorder and a history of domestic abuse: intervention refinement and a randomised feasibility trial (coMforT study).

BACKGROUND: Women who have experienced domestic violence and abuse (DVA) are at increased risk of developing post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and complex PTSD (CPTSD). In 2014-2015, we developed a prototype trauma-specific mindfulness-based cognitive therapy curriculum (TS-MBCT) for the treatment of PTSD in a DVA population. This study aimed to refine the prototype TS-MBCT and evaluate the feasibility of conducting a randomised controlled trial (RCT) testing its effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. METHODS: Intervention refinement phase was informed by evidence synthesis from a literature review, qualitative interviews with professionals and DVA survivors, and a consensus exercise with experts in trauma and mindfulness. We tested the refined TS-MBCT intervention in an individually randomised parallel group feasibility trial with pre-specified progression criteria, a traffic light system, and embedded process and health economics evaluations. RESULTS: The TS-MBCT intervention consisted of eight group sessions and home practice. We screened 109 women in a DVA agency and recruited 20 (15 TS-MBCT, 5 self-referral to National Health Service (NHS) psychological treatment), with 80% follow-up at 6 months. Our TS-MBCT intervention had 73% uptake, 100% retention, and high acceptability. Participants suggested recruitment via multiple agencies, and additional safety measures. Randomisation into the NHS control arm did not work due to long waiting lists and previous negative experiences. Three self-administered PTSD/CPTSD questionnaires produced differing outcomes thus a clinician administered measure might work better. We met six out of nine feasibility progression criteria at green and three at amber targets demonstrating that it is possible to conduct a full-size RCT of the TS-MBCT intervention after making minor amendments to recruitment and randomisation procedures, the control intervention, primary outcomes measures, and intervention content. At 6 months, none of the PTSD/CPTSD outcomes ruled out a clinically important difference between trial arms indicating that it is reasonable to proceed to a full-size RCT to estimate these outcomes with greater precision. CONCLUSIONS: A future RCT of the coMforT TS-MBCT intervention should have an internal pilot, recruit from multiple DVA agencies, NHS and non-NHS settings, have an active control psychological treatment, use robust randomisation and safety procedures, and clinician-administered measures for PTSD/CPTSD. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN64458065 11/01/2019.