Prison-based psychological and social interventions to improve the well-being of women prisoners: A systematic review

Abstract

Objective

Women prisoners face numerous psychological and social challenges during imprisonment. This systematic review evaluates prison-based psychological and social interventions designed to enhance the well-being of women prisoners.

Methods

This systematic review followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines and searched across four databases: Scopus, Sage, Web of Science, and PubMed, covering studies from 1st January 1992 to 20th October 2024. The inclusion criteria were randomised controlled trial (RCT) or quasi experimental design research involving women prisoners over 18 in prison settings, targeting psychological or social outcomes, with pre- and post-intervention results, and published in English. The exclusion criteria were case studies, pilot studies, non-prison settings, mixed gender samples without separate women analysis, mental disorders focused research, medication-only treatments, unclear intervention details, post-intervention-only outcomes, studies on recidivism or substance relapse, grey literature, and non-English publications. The mixed methods appraisal tool (MMAT) was used to evaluate risk of bias, and a narrative synthesis was conducted due to data heterogeneity.

Results

Out of 8233 documents, 15 studies examining psychological and social interventions were included. Behavioural methods effectively managed anger, dog-assisted interventions provided emotional support, transactional analysis and reality therapy enhanced self-esteem and self-efficacy, logotherapy boosted hope, video-based learning fostered inner peace, and Choice Theory Connections supported overall well-being among women prisoners. Effective parenting interventions incorporated parenting education, curriculum with children, and sufficient duration of programme.

Conclusion

The review's limitations include high attrition rates due to prison rules and regulations, non-randomised comparison studies, and reliance on self-report measures.