The effectiveness of interventions to prevent recidivism in perpetrators of intimate partner violence: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: Previous reviews of interventions to prevent recidivistic intimate partner violence (IPV) have cited minimal benefits and have been critical of interventions adopting a 'one-size-fits-all' approach to a heterogenous category of offenders. The present systematic review and meta-analysis assesses evidence for interventions situated in a risk-need-responsivity framework, in comparison with the more traditional 'one-size-fits-all' intervention approach. Method: Six databases (PsycINFO, Web of Science, PubMed, EMBASE, SCOPUS, PILOTS) were searched for studies examining effectiveness of IPV interventions. Results: Thirty-one studies met the inclusion criteria. Studies were analysed separately depending on whether they compared two treatments (n = 17) or used a no-treatment control group (n = 14). In the meta-analysis, overall effect sizes were OR = 0.52, 95% CI [0.35-0.78] for interventions with follow-up of <= one year (p < 0.001) and OR = 0.60, 95% CI [0.46-0.78] for interventions with follow-up between one and two years (p < 0.001). The pooled effects from the studies using follow-up of greater than two years did not reach statistical significance. Subgroup analyses suggested that effect sizes differed across treatment types, with risk-needresponsivity treatments performing well against other modalities. Conclusions: Risk-need-responsivity treatments showed promise in the short-to-medium term, but the challenge of sustaining effects into the longer term remains.

Automated summary

Interventions based on risk-need-responsivity framework show promise in preventing recidivistic intimate partner violence in the short-to-medium term, but sustaining effects in the longer term remains a challenge.