A Randomized Controlled Trial Assessing the Efficacy of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Substance‐Dependent Domestic Violence Offenders: An Integrated Substance Abuse‐Domestic Violence Treatment Approach (SADV)

Abstract

The current study evaluates a therapy for substance-dependent perpetrators of partner violence. Sixty-three males arrested for partner violence within the past year were randomized to a cognitive behavioral substance abuse-domestic violence (SADV; n = 29) or a drug counseling (DC; n = 34) condition. Seventy percent of offenders completed eight core sessions with no differences between SADV and DC conditions in the amount of substance or aggression at pretreatment. SADV participants had fewer cocaine-positive toxicology screens and breathalyzer results during treatment, were less likely to engage in aggressive behavior proximal to a drinking episode, and reported fewer episodes of violence than DC participants at posttreatment follow-up. SADV shows promise in decreasing addiction and partner violence among substance-dependent male offenders.

Integrated treatment options for male perpetrators of intimate partner violence

“…Both treatment conditions consisted of 12 weekly individual sessions with optional couples modules. Controlling for partner contact, outcomes in the SADV condition were superior to those in the active treatment comparison group with fewer days of self‐reported physical IPV perpetration following alcohol use as well as fewer positive alcohol and cocaine test results on objective instruments . Voluntary participation of female partners in both studies was minimal and resulted in insufficient collateral data for meaningful analysis.…”

Interventions to Reduce Intimate Partner Violence Perpetration by Men Who Use Substances: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Efficacy

“…Application of the inclusion criteria resulted in a total of 13 manuscripts from nine trials ( Figure 1). Nine trials were included and grouped into three intervention types (Table 1) Easton et al, 2017;Kraanen et al, 2013;Mbilinyi et al, 2011). There were insufficient data to conduct meta-analyses for the two other intervention types.…”

“…One intervention was delivered to men in a group and one provided both group and individual sessions (Palmstierna et al, 2012). Four interventions employed the principles of CBT Easton et al, 2017;Palmstierna et al, 2012;Satyanarayana et al, 2016). Of these, three adopted CBT in targeting both IPV and SU simultaneously Easton et al, 2017;Satyanarayana et al, 2016), while the remaining intervention targeted IPV alone (Palmstierna et al, 2012).…”

“…Four interventions employed the principles of CBT Easton et al, 2017;Palmstierna et al, 2012;Satyanarayana et al, 2016). Of these, three adopted CBT in targeting both IPV and SU simultaneously Easton et al, 2017;Satyanarayana et al, 2016), while the remaining intervention targeted IPV alone (Palmstierna et al, 2012). Another trial adopted both CBT and motivational interviewing (MI) (Kraanen et al, 2013), using both approaches to target IPV and SU simultaneously.…”

“…The time-line follow-back (TLFB) interview, a calendar-assisted structured interview (Fals-Stewart et al, 2000), measured substance use in most trials Easton et al, 2017;Mbilinyi et al, 2011;Murphy et al, 2018;Stuart et al, 2013). The revised Conflict Tactics Scale (CTS-2;Straus et al, 1996) was used to measure IPV in all but one trial (Murphy et al, 2018) .…”