evidoria

← Back to browse

Good practice Imported

Strength at Home — US Veterans' and Military Trauma-Informed Programmes for Partner-Violence Prevention (Men's Group and Couples Formats, Randomised-Trial Evidence)

United States of America · Boston · See the United States of America profile · See the Boston profile

Top 68% 52/100 · Ask Evidence Copilot about this practice

Manualised 12-week trauma-informed CBT programme for veterans and service members who use partner violence, tested in two RCTs (men's group, n=135; couples, 138 couples) with significant reductions in physical and psychological abuse; partner effects weaker, single-site and short

Strength at Home — US Veterans' and Military Trauma-Informed Programmes for Partner-Violence Prevention (Men's Group and Couples Formats, Randomised-Trial Evidence)

Details

Promoter
VA Boston Healthcare System / Boston University (Casey Taft et al.)
Period
2010–2024
Keywords
domestic violence, perpetrator programme, veterans, military, trauma-informed CBT

Description

Strength at Home (SAH) is a manualised, trauma-informed cognitive-behavioural intervention developed by Casey Taft and colleagues (VA Boston / Boston University) for male veterans and service members who use intimate partner violence (IPV). It targets social-information-processing deficits, anger, PTSD-related symptoms and controlling behaviour. It exists in a 12-week men's group format (SAH-M) and a couples format (SAH-C) designed as IPV prevention for military couples.
Evidence: In a randomised controlled trial in two VA hospitals (135 male veterans/service members, 111 female partners; Taft et al., Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 2016), SAH-M produced significantly greater reductions than enhanced treatment as usual in physical IPV (β=-0.135, P=.029), psychological IPV (β=-0.304, P=.026) and controlling behaviours (β=-0.072, P=.010) over 3- and 6-month follow-ups. A later hybrid effectiveness-implementation RCT of SAH-C on a military installation (138 couples; Creech et al., Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 2024) found greater reductions in physical, severe physical, sexual, psychological and coercive-control IPV, and in suicidality, versus supportive prevention.
Caveats: partner-reported outcomes were less robust than service-member self-reports; follow-ups are short (months, not years); trials are US-based, single-system and in veteran/military populations, so transfer to civilian or non-US perpetrator services is untested; no cost data were found. It is one of few perpetrator interventions backed by randomised evidence, which makes it valuable as a benchmark.

Read the full analysis: https://www.psychiatrist.com/jcp/strength-at-home

Implementation

Implementation detail (cost, timeline, staffing, conditions for success) is not yet available for this practice.

Do you run this practice? Claim it — verified implementers get a public contact pathway and can propose corrections.

Data sources

Where this practice's information was retrieved from, and when.

Attachments

Similar practices you may find useful