Previous reviews of the effectiveness of intimate partner violence (IPV) programmes have shown mixed results. A systematic review with narrative synthesis was conducted to understand the methodological challenges in determining the effectiveness of IPV perpetrator programmes. A two-stage search strategy was employed. Firstly, a systematic search was conducted across six electronic databases: CINAHL, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Global Health, ASSIA, and Web of Science to identify systematic reviews exploring the effectiveness of interventions for IPV perpetrators. Secondly, primary studies from selected reviews were screened for inclusion. In total, 508 full-text manuscripts from 38 reviews were assessed against eligibility criteria. Twenty-six randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were included in this review. Methodological issues included the following: (1) short-term follow-up; (2) an over-reliance on perpetrator self-reported (physical) IPV outcomes with few studies collecting collateral victim IPV reports; (3) a lack of data presented on attendance and completion rates; and (4) changes in partners or having more than one partner were not considered in the methods or analysis. Perpetrators may under-report their abusive behaviour. No RCTs accounted for changes in relationship status nor reported on outcomes for new or multiple partners, potentially underestimating IPV recidivism as a result. Future evaluations of IPV perpetrator programmes should collect victim and perpetrator self-reported outcomes of different types of IPV victimisation and perpetration, respectively, alongside official re-offence data over the longer term. Evaluations should present data on treatment completion and dose response to enhance our understanding of what works for whom and to examine outcomes for new or multiple partners.
Johnston et al. (Tue,) studied this question.