Intimate partner violence (IPV) and depression are significant public health problems, yet there are no empirically tested treatments for community-based, clinically depressed women with IPV histories. This uncontrolled pilot study examined the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary benefits of a community-based administration of brief, group interpersonal psychotherapy (IPT) for depressed women with lifetime histories of IPV (IPT for IPV) to reduce depressive symptoms and improve interpersonal function. We recruited 32 women ages 18 years and older with moderately severe to severe depressive symptoms and IPV histories from a community agency serving women who have experienced IPV. We conducted assessments 1-week prior to treatment and 1-week and 3-months posttreatment. Our feasibility findings indicated that 21 nontreatment-seeking women (65.6%) began treatment and attended a mean of 5.9 (SD = 2.1) sessions. Our initial findings suggest the viability of delivering IPT for IPV in a community agency, as well as its significant potential in reducing depressive symptom severity and interpersonal dysfunction. Therefore, IPT for IPV should be explored further as an effective treatment for depressed women with IPV histories.

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a public health issue with complex physical health, mental health and social consequences that can exacerbate survivors' barriers to health care engagement and support. Furthermore, health care professionals are often unaware of or feel ill-equipped to address survivors' complex needs. Depression and chronic pain are particularly prevalent co-occurring problems for survivors and can impede engagement and outcomes in traditional health care. This study's purpose was to understand what interventions might be more responsive to survivors' myriad needs, particularlly those with depression and pain. Survivors were involved with the design, execution, analysis, and interpretation of results, based on community-based participatory research principles. Intervention development happened in two phases: the first consisted of focus groups with survivors to inform the intervention and the second included intervention design, informed by a community advisory board (CAB). Thirty-one survivors participated in Phase 1, and they reported preferring a range of support including formal help-seeking, informal coping strategies, and spirituality. In Phase 2, the CAB (comprised of survivors, health care professionals, and researchers) identified three distinct aspects of a comprehensive IPV intervention: (a) education regarding both the complex health issues and available local resources; (b) an integrated consultation service for providers to seek recommendations for responding to the full spectrum of survivors' needs; and (c) a trauma-informed, accessible clinic. Academic medical centers could not have designed this intervention in isolation; survivors and providers played an integral part of this process, and continue to inform our current work.

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00895999.

No abstract