Is there adequate evidence to support the use of compassion focused therapy group interventions with forensic mental health service users? A rapid evidence assessment

Lucy D’Souza, Danielle A. Lawrence
{"title":"Is there adequate evidence to support the use of compassion focused therapy group interventions with forensic mental health service users? A rapid evidence assessment","authors":"Lucy D’Souza, Danielle A. Lawrence","doi":"10.53841/bpsfu.2021.1.136.39","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Compassion focused therapy (CFT) is a model of psychotherapy based on cultivating the capacity for compassion to others and self. The evidence base has grown considerably in the last decade regarding CFT’s effectiveness for a range of mental health problems. However, the literature supporting CFT as a treatment provision for forensic service users with mental health needs is lacking despite the observed overlap in needs between this population and their non-offending clinical counterparts. This rapid evidence assessment (REA) sought to evaluate the current evidence of CFT’s effectiveness as a group therapeutic intervention with clinical populations to allow consideration of the use of CFT with individuals with both mental health and criminogenic needs. A search of electronic databases was undertaken and after a process of review and extraction 10 papers were included. These studies showed promising effects of group-level CFT for those with complex mental health needs. Some evidence emerged of CFT generating significant improvements compared to no treatment and treatment as usual (TAU), but insufficient evidence has been produced in respect of whether CFT can supersede traditional ‘gold-standard’ approaches such as Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT). Tentative conclusions are made regarding the applicability of CFT interventions but the observed reductions in shame and self-criticism and a move towards more guilt-based motivational drives suggest that this approach shows some promise in being able to assist forensic service users in taking more responsibility for their harmful actions and foster social and affiliative processes with others. Further high quality RCTs are needed in order to make firm conclusions about the clinical utility of this therapy for forensic populations with mental health needs.","PeriodicalId":426788,"journal":{"name":"Forensic Update","volume":"39 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Forensic Update","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.53841/bpsfu.2021.1.136.39","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Compassion focused therapy (CFT) is a model of psychotherapy based on cultivating the capacity for compassion to others and self. The evidence base has grown considerably in the last decade regarding CFT’s effectiveness for a range of mental health problems. However, the literature supporting CFT as a treatment provision for forensic service users with mental health needs is lacking despite the observed overlap in needs between this population and their non-offending clinical counterparts. This rapid evidence assessment (REA) sought to evaluate the current evidence of CFT’s effectiveness as a group therapeutic intervention with clinical populations to allow consideration of the use of CFT with individuals with both mental health and criminogenic needs. A search of electronic databases was undertaken and after a process of review and extraction 10 papers were included. These studies showed promising effects of group-level CFT for those with complex mental health needs. Some evidence emerged of CFT generating significant improvements compared to no treatment and treatment as usual (TAU), but insufficient evidence has been produced in respect of whether CFT can supersede traditional ‘gold-standard’ approaches such as Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT). Tentative conclusions are made regarding the applicability of CFT interventions but the observed reductions in shame and self-criticism and a move towards more guilt-based motivational drives suggest that this approach shows some promise in being able to assist forensic service users in taking more responsibility for their harmful actions and foster social and affiliative processes with others. Further high quality RCTs are needed in order to make firm conclusions about the clinical utility of this therapy for forensic populations with mental health needs.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
是否有足够的证据支持对法医心理健康服务使用者使用以同情为重点的治疗小组干预?快速证据评估
以同情为中心的治疗(CFT)是一种基于培养同情他人和自我的能力的心理治疗模式。在过去十年中,关于CFT对一系列心理健康问题的有效性的证据基础大大增加。然而,支持CFT作为有心理健康需求的法医服务使用者的治疗提供的文献是缺乏的,尽管观察到这一人群与他们的非犯罪临床对口者之间的需求重叠。本快速证据评估(REA)旨在评估CFT作为临床人群群体治疗干预有效性的现有证据,以便考虑在有心理健康和犯罪需求的个体中使用CFT。对电子数据库进行了检索,经过审查和摘录后,纳入了10篇论文。这些研究表明,群体层面的CFT对那些有复杂心理健康需求的人有很好的效果。一些证据表明,与不治疗和常规治疗(TAU)相比,CFT产生了显著的改善,但关于CFT能否取代传统的“金标准”方法(如认知行为疗法(CBT))的证据不足。关于CFT干预措施的适用性得出了初步结论,但观察到羞耻感和自我批评的减少以及更多基于内疚的动机驱动的转变表明,这种方法在帮助法医服务使用者为他们的有害行为承担更多责任以及促进与他人的社会和附属进程方面显示出一些希望。需要进一步的高质量随机对照试验,以确定该疗法对有精神健康需求的法医人群的临床效用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Editorial from the guest editors Reflections as a programme leader of MSc forensic psychology: Decolonising the forensic psychology curriculum in higher education Equality, diversity and inclusion in forensic practice Improving access to forensic psychology education and training for learners with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) Reflections on the role of religion in desistance and mental wellbeing for forensic clients
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1