10
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
2 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      The identification and treatment of mental health and substance misuse problems in sexual assault services: A systematic review

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Specialist sexual assault services, which collect forensic evidence and offer holistic healthcare to people following sexual assault, have been established internationally. In England, these services are called sexual assault referral centres (SARCs). Mental health and substance misuse problems are common among SARC attendees, but little is known about how SARCs should address these needs. This review aims to seek and synthesise evidence regarding approaches to identification and support for mental health and substance misuse problems in SARCs and corresponding services internationally; empirical evidence regarding effective service models; and stakeholders’ views and policy recommendations about optimal SARC practice.

          Methods

          A systematic review was undertaken. PsycINFO, MEDLINE, IBSS and CINAHL were searched from 1975 to August 2018. A web-based search up to December 2018 was also conducted to identify government and expert guidelines on SARCs. Quality assessment and narrative synthesis were conducted.

          Results

          We included 107 papers. We found that identification based on clinical judgement, supportive counselling and referral to other services without active follow-up were the most common approaches. Evaluations of interventions for post-rape psychopathology in attendees of sexual assault services provided mixed evidence of moderate quality. Very little evidence was found regarding interventions or support for substance misuse. Stakeholders emphasised the importance of accessibility, flexibility, continuity of care, in-house psychological support, staff trained in mental health as well as specialist support for LGBT groups and people with learning difficulties. Guidelines suggested that SARCs should assess for mental health and substance misuse and provide in-house emotional support, but the extent and nature of support were not clarified. Both stakeholders and guidelines recommended close partnership between sexual assault services and local counselling services.

          Conclusions

          This review suggests that there is big variation in the mental health and substance misuse provision both across and within different sexual assault service models. We found no robust evidence about how sexual assault services can achieve good mental health and substance misuse outcomes for service users. Clearer guidance for service planners and commissioners, informed by robust evidence about optimal service organisations and pathways, is required.

          PROSPERO registration number: CRD42018119706

          Related collections

          Most cited references129

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement

          David Moher and colleagues introduce PRISMA, an update of the QUOROM guidelines for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            CHILDREN'S REPORTS OF PARENTAL BEHAVIOR: AN INVENTORY.

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Prevalence of intimate partner violence: findings from the WHO multi-country study on women's health and domestic violence.

              Violence against women is a serious human rights abuse and public health issue. Despite growing evidence of the size of the problem, current evidence comes largely from industrialised settings, and methodological differences limit the extent to which comparisons can be made between studies. We aimed to estimate the extent of physical and sexual intimate partner violence against women in 15 sites in ten countries: Bangladesh, Brazil, Ethiopia, Japan, Namibia, Peru, Samoa, Serbia and Montenegro, Thailand, and the United Republic of Tanzania. Standardised population-based household surveys were done between 2000 and 2003. Women aged 15-49 years were interviewed and those who had ever had a male partner were asked in private about their experiences of physically and sexually violent and emotionally abusive acts. 24,097 women completed interviews, with around 1500 interviews per site. The reported lifetime prevalence of physical or sexual partner violence, or both, varied from 15% to 71%, with two sites having a prevalence of less than 25%, seven between 25% and 50%, and six between 50% and 75%. Between 4% and 54% of respondents reported physical or sexual partner violence, or both, in the past year. Men who were more controlling were more likely to be violent against their partners. In all but one setting women were at far greater risk of physical or sexual violence by a partner than from violence by other people. The findings confirm that physical and sexual partner violence against women is widespread. The variation in prevalence within and between settings highlights that this violence in not inevitable, and must be addressed.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: Data curationRole: Formal analysisRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Project administrationRole: Writing – original draftRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curationRole: Funding acquisitionRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Project administrationRole: Writing – original draftRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Data curationRole: Formal analysisRole: InvestigationRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: InvestigationRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: InvestigationRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: InvestigationRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Funding acquisitionRole: InvestigationRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Funding acquisitionRole: InvestigationRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Funding acquisitionRole: InvestigationRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: InvestigationRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Funding acquisitionRole: InvestigationRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: InvestigationRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: InvestigationRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: InvestigationRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Funding acquisitionRole: InvestigationRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Formal analysisRole: Funding acquisitionRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Project administrationRole: SupervisionRole: Writing – original draftRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Editor
                Journal
                PLoS One
                PLoS ONE
                plos
                plosone
                PLoS ONE
                Public Library of Science (San Francisco, CA USA )
                1932-6203
                10 April 2020
                2020
                : 15
                : 4
                : e0231260
                Affiliations
                [1 ] Division of Psychiatry, University College London, London, United Kingdom
                [2 ] School of Healthcare, Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom
                [3 ] School of Human and Health Sciences, University of Huddersfield, Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, United Kingdom
                [4 ] Centre for Assistive Technology and Connected Healthcare (CATCH) and School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom
                [5 ] Centre for Criminology and Sociology, Royal Holloway University of London, Surrey, United Kingdom
                [6 ] Section of Women’s Mental Health, Health Service and Population Research Department, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, King’s College London, London, United Kingdom
                [7 ] The Survivors Trust, Rugby, Warwickshire, United Kingdom
                [8 ] Bristol Medical School: Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
                Swinburne University of Technology, AUSTRALIA
                Author notes

                Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3172-2685
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4764-0411
                http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9866-788X
                Article
                PONE-D-19-28688
                10.1371/journal.pone.0231260
                7147790
                32275695
                a7496098-3759-4a1b-81d2-e062239b902d
                © 2020 Stefanidou et al

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

                History
                : 14 October 2019
                : 19 March 2020
                Page count
                Figures: 1, Tables: 6, Pages: 30
                Funding
                Funded by: funder-id http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100002001, Health Services and Delivery Research Programme;
                Award ID: 16/117/03
                Award Recipient :
                This work was funded through a grant awarded to Professor Elizabeth Hughes by the UK Department of Health National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) under its Health Services and Delivery Research Programme (Reference Number: HS&DR 16/117/03). The views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, NIHR or the Department of Health. The funders and the sponsors played no role in study design, data collection, analysis, decision to publish or preparation of the manuscript.
                Categories
                Research Article
                Social Sciences
                Sociology
                Criminology
                Crime
                Rape and Sexual Assault
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Mental Health and Psychiatry
                Research and Analysis Methods
                Research Design
                Qualitative Studies
                People and places
                Geographical locations
                North America
                United States
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Diagnostic Medicine
                Clinical Laboratory Sciences
                Forensics
                Social Sciences
                Law and Legal Sciences
                Forensics
                Research and Analysis Methods
                Research Design
                Survey Research
                Questionnaires
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Psychology
                Emotions
                Social Sciences
                Psychology
                Emotions
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Mental Health and Psychiatry
                Mental Health Therapies
                Custom metadata
                All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.

                Uncategorized
                Uncategorized

                Comments

                Comment on this article