The Effectiveness of Trauma-Focused Interventions in Prison Settings: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is overrepresented in prison relative to community populations and can be difficult to manage in an environment which can inherently exacerbate trauma-related symptomology. Little is known about the effectiveness of trauma-focused interventions in prison and less is known about factors that moderate the effectiveness of these interventions. AIM/METHODS: We examined the effectiveness of trauma-focused interventions in prison relative to prison controls using meta-analytic techniques. We further used meta-regression analysis to examine treatment, methodological and participant-level moderators to determine factors that increased the effectiveness of these interventions. RESULTS: From 16 studies eligible for the meta-analysis, we found a small but significant effect size for trauma-focused interventions. Phase 2 trauma processing interventions and interventions delivered individually led to greater reductions in PTSD symptoms. Studies utilizing an active treatment control resulted in smaller effect sizes than those using waitlist or no contact controls. Treatment length, study quality, outcome type, and gender were not significant moderators of treatment effectiveness. CONCLUSION: Findings from this review are encouraging but should be interpreted with caution. Results suggest that trauma processing therapies, and individual modality trauma-focused interventions can be effective and delivered successfully in prison. However, inadequate comparison groups do not allow a firm conclusion to be drawn. There is a need for high quality Randomized Controlled Trial's that additionally measure Complex PTSD, utilize a modular treatment approach, and include treatments recommended in the National Institute for health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines such as Trauma-focused CBT and Eye Movement Desensitization Reprocessing (EMDR).

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 59 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.