Suchergebnisse

Objective: A meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of solution-focused brief therapy (SFBT). Method: Hierarchical linear modeling software was used to synthesize the primary studies to calculate an overall effect size estimate and test for between-study variability. Results: Solution-focused brief therapy demonstrated small but positive treatment effects favoring SFBT group on the outcome measures (d = 0.13 to 0.26). Only the magnitude of the effect for internalizing behavior problems was statistically significant at the p < .05 level, thereby indicating that the treatment effect for SFBT group is different than the control group. Conclusions: This study allows social workers interested in solution-focused brief therapy to examine the empirical evidence quickly and with more definitive information.

This study examined the effectiveness of solution-focused brief therapy (SFBT) on child well-being and family functioning outcomes for child welfare involved parents. A randomized controlled trial design was used to evaluate the effectiveness of SFBT as compared to treatment-as-usual in an outpatient substance abuse treatment center. Mixed linear models tested within and between-group changes using intent-to-treat analysis ( N = 180). Hedges's g effect sizes examined the magnitude of treatment effects. Both conditions reported improvements on the child well-being measures (Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function [BRIEF]-Parent Report and Child Behavior Checklist-School Age Form [CBCL-SA]) and family functioning measures (Adult-Adolescent Parenting Inventory [AAPI-2] and Center for Epidemiologic Studies-Depression [CES-D] Short Form) at posttest. While none of the between group analyses were statistically significant on either outcome domains, effect sizes did show improvements in the small to medium range for both groups. SFBT effect sizes for BRIEF subscales ranged from .024 to .267 and for control group ranged from .136 to .363. SFBT effect sizes on CBCL-SA subscales ranged from .059 to .321 and for control group ranged from .101 to .313. SFBT effect sizes on AAPI-2 subscales ranged from .006 to .620 and control group ranged from .023 to .624. SFBT effect sizes on CES-D measure were .428 and for control group were .317. Results show SFBT to be an effective intervention for helping parents around child well-being and family functioning outcomes similar to current empirically-supported therapies. SFBT provides a more strengths-based approach to help families improve family well-being and thus help improve their child's well-being.

Objective: This study examined the effectiveness of solution-focused brief therapy (SFBT) intervention on substance abuse and trauma-related problems. Methods: A randomized controlled trial design was used to evaluate the effectiveness of SFBT in primary substance use treatment services for child welfare involved parents in outpatient treatment for substance use disorders. Mixed linear models were used to test within- and between-group changes using intent-to-treat analysis ( N = 64). Hedges's g effect sizes were also calculated to examine magnitude of treatment effects. Results: Both groups decreased on the Addiction Severity Index-Self-Report and the Trauma Symptom Checklist-40. The between group effect sizes were not statistically significant on either measures, thus SFBT produced similar results as the research supported treatments the control group received. Conclusion: Results support the use of SFBT in treating substance use and trauma and provide an alternative approach that is more strengths based and less problem focused.

Objective: This systematic review examined the effectiveness of school social work practices using meta-analytic techniques. Method: Hierarchical linear modeling software was used to calculate overall effect size estimates as well as test for between-study variability. Results: A total of 21 studies were included in the final analysis. Unconditional random effects model shows an overall weighted mean effect size estimate of .23 for externalizing problem outcomes and .40 for internalizing problem outcomes; both categories were statistically significant at the p < .05 level. Subgroup analysis for academic outcomes showed mixed results for knowledge, attendance, and grade point average outcome measures. Conclusions: Results highlight the positive impact school social workers may have on student emotional, mental, behavioral, and academic outcomes.

Objective: To examine the effectiveness of interventions for incarcerated women. Method: The researchers use a two-model system: the risk-reduction model for studies analyzing interventions to reduce recidivism rates, and the enhancement model for studies that target psychological and physical well-being. Results: Incarcerated women who participate in substance abuse interventions appear less likely to reoffend than those who do not participate. Enhancement model studies report mixed results. Overall, psychological-oriented interventions and substance abuse programs improve mental health symptoms and substance use among participants as compared to control or comparison groups. Results for HIV prevention programs are ambiguous, and parenting skill programs show no significant effect. Conclusion: Results highlight interventions that appear useful with female inmates. More rigorous research is needed to address many of these evidence-based interventions.

This article describes the process of having solution-focused brief therapy (SFBT) be evaluated by various federal registries as an evidence-based practice (EBP) intervention. The authors submitted SFBT for evaluation for inclusion on three national EBP registry lists in the United States: the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), What Works Clearinghouse (WWC), and Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (OJJDP). Results of our submission found SFBT was not reviewed by SAMHSA and WWC because it was not prioritized highly enough for review, but it was rated as "promising" by OJJDP. Implications for practitioners and recommendations regarding the status of SFBT as an EBP model are discussed.