SBU:s upplysningstjänst
Publikation nr: ut202311
Publicerad: 23 mars 2023
Nedladdad: 6 april 2025
Motiverande samtal för tvångsvårdade ungdomar

Observera att det är möjligt att ladda ner hela eller delar av en publikation. Denna pdf/utskrift behöver därför inte vara komplett. Hela publikationen och den senaste versionen hittar ni på www.sbu.se/ut202311

Motiverande samtal för tvångsvårdade ungdomar

Publicerad: 23 mars 2023

Fråga och sammanfattning

Motiverande samtal (MI) är en samtalsmetod som används för att stärka förutsättningarna för beteendeförändring hos en individ. För ungdomar i institutionsvård kan motiverande samtal användas med syfte att minska skadligt bruk av alkohol och droger eller kriminalitet, men även att stärka motivationen att till exempel delta i skolundervisning.

Fråga

Vilken sammanställd forskning och vetenskapliga studier finns om effekten av motiverande samtal tvångsvårdade ungdomar?

Frågeställare: Statens institutionsstyrelse (SiS)

Sammanfattning

SBU:s upplysningstjänst har efter litteratursökning inte identifierat någon relevant systematisk översikt. Att systematiska översikter saknas ska dock inte tolkas som att insatsen saknar effekt, utan att sammanställd forskning behövs för att förbättra kunskapsläget.

Upplysningstjänsten har identifierat fyra relevanta artiklar från primärstudier. Studierna har undersökt effekten av motiverande samtal på substansbruk och kriminalitet för ungdomar i fängelse. Primärstudier granskas inte med avseende på risk för bias av Upplysningstjänsten så inga resultat eller slutsatser har redovisats i svaret.

Bakgrund

Barn och ungdomar upp till 20 år som begått allvarliga brott eller som riskerar att skadas av eget missbruk, kriminalitet eller annat socialt nedbrytande beteende och där det bedömts att frivillig vård inte är tillräcklig, vårdas i enlighet med LVU1 eller LSU2 på särskilda ungdomshem i Statens institutionsstyrelses regi. Statens institutionsstyrelse hade år 2021 21 särskilda ungdomshem, varav 6 institutioner för ungdomar som dömts till sluten ungdomsvård. Totalt 971 individer togs in för vård under en eller flera perioder [1].

Motiverande samtal (engelska: motivational interviewing, MI) är en interventionsform med strukturerade behandlingssamtal som ursprungligen utvecklades för personer med skadligt alkoholbruk. Idag är motiverande samtal vanligt förekommande inom svensk sjukvård och socialtjänst när behov finns att motivera patienter till beteendeförändring, till exempel vid rökning, skadligt bruk av alkohol, förändringar av kost och fysisk aktivitet eller för att öka patienters vilja att ta föreskrivna läkemedel. Motiverande samtal används även för att motivera till deltagande i aktiviteter, som behandling eller utbildning. Ett empatiskt och reflekterande förhållningssätt är centralt för behandlaren. Motiverande samtal syftar till att medvetandegöra klienten om vägar till förändring och stärka personens egen motivation till att förändra sin situation [2] men även för att motivera till deltagande i andra behandlingar [3].
Motiverande samtal kan ges både i kort rådgivning och vid längre behandlingar. Samtalen är oftast individuella, men även gruppsamtal förekommer.

1. Lag (1990:52) med särskilda bestämmelser om vård av unga.
2. Lag (1998:603) om verkställighet av sluten ungdomsvård.

Frågeställning och avgränsningar

Upplysningstjänsten har tillsammans med frågeställaren formulerat frågan enligt följande PICO3:

Upplysningstjänsten har gjort sökningar (Bilaga 1) i databaserna MedLine, Scopus, PsycInfo, Criminal Justice Abstracts och SOCINDEX, samt i INAHTA:s4 databas för HTA5 -rapporter. Vi har även handsökt publikationer på webbsidor för regionala HTA-organisationer och myndigheter.

Upplysningstjänsten inkluderar artiklar publicerade i vetenskapliga tidskrifter samt systematiska översikter och rapporter från myndigheter och HTA-organisationer, som är publicerade på engelska eller ett av de skandinaviska språken.

3. PICO är en förkortning för patient/population/problem, intervention/index test, comparison/control (jämförelseintervention) och outcome (utfallsmått).

4. International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment (INAHTA).

5. Utvärdering av hälso- och sjukvårdens (och i SBU:s fall socialtjänstens) metoder (engelska: Health Technology Assessment).

Resultat från sökningen

Upplysningstjänstens litteratursökning genererade totalt 3 544 artikelsammanfattningar (abstrakt) efter dubblettkontroll. Ett flödesschema för urvalsprocessen visas i Bilaga 2. Två utredare på SBU läste alla artikelsammanfattningar och bedömde att 40 översikter och 7 artiklar från primärstudier vara relevanta för frågan. Dessa artiklar lästes i fulltext av en utredare och de artiklar som inte var relevanta för frågan exkluderades. Exkluderade artiklar finns listade i Bilaga 3.

Upplysningstjänsten fann ingen systematisk översikt som var relevant för denna fråga och därför redovisas inga resultat eller slutsatser i Upplysningstjänstens svar. De vanligaste exklusionsorsakerna var antingen att fel intervention undersökts eller att populationen inte inkluderade eller särredovisade tvångsvårdade ungdomar.

I svaret listas fyra artiklar som är relevanta för frågan men som inte bedömts med avseende på risk för bias. Alla studierna är från samma forskargrupp och från samma fängelsepopulation.

Primärstudier bedöms inte för risk för bias av SBU:s upplysningstjänst eftersom det ställer krav på sakkunskap inom forskningsområdet. Det är därför möjligt att flera av de relevanta primärstudier som inkluderats i svaret kan ha högre risk för bias än de studier som SBU inkluderar i andra rapporter.

Primärstudier

SBU:s upplysningstjänst identifierade fyra relevanta artiklar [4] [5] [6] [7]. För dessa har inte risken för bias bedömts och av det skälet finns inte resultat eller slutsatser beskrivna i text eller tabell.

Tabell 1 Relevanta primärstudier (risk för bias har inte bedömts för dessa)/Table 1 Relevant primary studies (not assessed for risk of bias).
DAS= Delinquent Activities Scale; TLFB= The Timeline Followback
Included references Population/ Setting Intervention/ Control Outcome measures
Stein et al, 2006 [6]
Effects of Motivational Interviewing for Incarcerated Adolescents on Driving Under the Influence after Release
RCT		 105 incarcerated adolescents (14–19) with alcohol or marijuana use. Juvenile correctional facility, United States. Intervention: Manualized motivational interviewing, focused on reducing alcohol or marijuana use and related risky behaviours and consequences. 90 min session at baseline and 60 min booster session prior to release.
Control: Relaxation training.		 Driving under the influence (Risks and Consequences Questionnaire RCQ)
Stein et al 2011 (a) [5]
Motivational interviewing to reduce substance-related consequences: Effects for incarcerated adolescents with depressed mood		 181 incarcerated adolescents (14–19) with alcohol or marijuana use. Juvenile correctional facility, United States. Same as above Risky behaviour and consequences associated with alcohol and marijuana use
(RCQ-A, RCQ-M)
Stein et al, 2011 (b) [7]
Motivational Interviewing for Incarcerated Adolescents:
Effects of Depressive Symptoms on Reducing Alcohol and Marijuana Use After Release		 162 incarcerated adolescents (14–19) with alcohol or marijuana use. Juvenile correctional facility, United States. Same as above Alcohol and marijuana use (TLFB)
Clair-Michaud et al, 2016 [4]
The Impact of Motivational Interviewing on Delinquent Behaviors in Incarcerated Adolescents
RCT 		 181 incarcerated adolescents (14–19) with alcohol or marijuana use. Juvenile correctional facility, United States. Same as above Alcohol and marijuana use General delinquent behaviours
(DAS) Delinquent behaviours under the influence of alcohol/marijuana

Vetenskapliga kunskapsluckor

Enligt SBU:s modell innebär en vetenskaplig kunskapslucka att det saknas evidens för vilken sammanvägd effekt en metod eller insats har, det vill säga kunskap från en systematisk översikt (Faktaruta 2).

SBU:s upplysningstjänst har efter litteratursökning identifierat fyra relevanta primärstudier men ingen systematisk översikt. För att besvara Upplysningstjänstens fråga behövs en välgjord systematisk översikt som identifierar alla relevanta primärstudier och väger samman resultaten.

Projektgrupp

Detta svar är sammanställt av Emma Palmqvist Wojda (utredare), Idha Kurtsdotter (utredare), Sara Fundell (projektadministratör), Irene Edebert (produktsamordnare), Knut Sundell (intern sakkunnig) samt Pernilla Östlund (avdelningschef) vid SBU.

Referenser

  1. Statens institutionsstyrelse (SiS). SiS årliga statistik. Solna: Statens institutionsstyrelse (SiS); 2022. [accessed 17 Nov 2022. Available from: https://www.stat-inst.se/publikationer/sis-arliga-statistik/.
  2. Socialstyrelsen. Nationella riktlinjer för vård och stöd vid missbruk och beroende. Stockholm: Socialstyrelsen; 2019. [accessed 17 Nov 2022]. Available from: https://www.socialstyrelsen.se/kunskapsstod-och-regler/regler-och-riktlinjer/nationella-riktlinjer/riktlinjer-och-utvarderingar/missbruk-och-beroende/.
  3. Miller WR, Rose GS. Toward a theory of motivational interviewing. Am Psychol. 2009;64:527-37. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016830.
  4. Clair-Michaud M, Martin RA, Stein LA, Bassett S, Lebeau R, Golembeske C. The Impact of Motivational Interviewing on Delinquent Behaviors in Incarcerated Adolescents. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2016;65:13-9. Available from: https://doi.org/doi:https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jsat.2015.09.003.
  5. Stein LA, Clair M, Lebeau R, Colby SM, Barnett NP, Golembeske C, et al. Motivational interviewing to reduce substance-related consequences: effects for incarcerated adolescents with depressed mood. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2011;118(2):475-8. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2011.03.023.
  6. Stein LA, Colby SM, Barnett NP, Monti PM, Golembeske C, Lebeau-Craven R. Effects of motivational interviewing for incarcerated adolescents on driving under the influence after release. Am J Addict. 2006;15 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):50-7. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/10550490601003680.
  7. Stein LA, Lebeau R, Colby SM, Barnett NP, Golembeske C, Monti PM. Motivational interviewing for incarcerated adolescents: effects of depressive symptoms on reducing alcohol and marijuana use after release. J Stud Alcohol Drugs. 2011;72(3):497-506. Available from: https://doi.org/10.15288/jsad.2011.72.497

Bilaga 1 Dokumentation av sökstrategier

Medline via OvidSP 9 Feb 2023

Title: MI in residential youth care
/ = Term from the MeSH controlled vocabulary; .sh = Term from the MeSH controlled vocabulary; exp= Term from MeSH including terms found below this term in the MeSH hierarchy; .ti,ab = Title or abstract; .tw = Title or abstract; .kf = Keywords; .kw = Keywords, exact; .bt = Book title. NLM Bookshelf.; .pt = Publication type; .ja = Journal abbreviation; .af = All fields
adjn = Adjacent. Proximity operator retrieving adjacent words, adj3 retrieves records with search terms within two terms from each other.; * or $ = Truncation; “ “ = Citation Marks; searches for an exact phrase
Search terms Items found
Intervention:
1. Motivational Interviewing/ or (motivational interview* or motivational counsel* or motivational enhancement).ab,bt,kw,ti. 6 484
Setting:
2. Custodial Care/ 190
3. Involuntary Treatment/ 121
4. Residential Treatment/ 3 307
5. Involuntary Commitment/ 72
6. Coercion/ 5 021
7. exp Correctional Facilities/ 11 337
8. Foster Home Care/ 3 865
9. Group Homes/ 1 019
10. Orphanages/ 488
11. (involuntary or non voluntary or detention or detain* or correctional or forensic or prison* or incarce* or custod* or coerc* or restraint or institutionali*).ab,kf,ti,bt. 156 526
12. ((forced or forcibl* or compulsory or mandatory or mandated or institution* or residential or locked) adj4 (care or treat* or setting* or hospitali* or psychiatr* or unit* or ward* or admission or admit* or commit*)).ab,kf,ti,bt. 66 893
13. ((foster or group or placement) adj3 (care or home*)).ab,kf,ti,bt. 26 131
14. or/2-13 253 126
Study types: systematic reviews and meta-analysis
15. ((Systematic Review/ or Meta-Analysis/ or Cochrane Database Syst Rev.ja. or ((systematic adj4 review) or "meta analys*" or metaanalys*).ti,bt,ab.) not (editorial/ or letter/ or case reports/))
Combined sets:
16. 1 and 15 [Intervention(MI) and Study type (Systematic review)] 471
17. 1 and 14 [Intervention (MI) and Setting (Residential Care)] 307
Final result
18. 16 OR 17 778

Scopus via scopus.com 9 Feb 2023

Title: Motivational interviewing in residential youth care
TITLE-ABS-KEY = Title, abstract or keywords (including indexed keywords and author keywords) ALL = All fields W/n = Within. Proximity operator retrieving terms within n words from each other. PRE/n = Precedes by. Proximity operator, the first term in the search must precede the second by n words. LIMIT-TO (X) = Includes only results of specified type, e.g., publication type or time range. DOCTYPE = Publication type; “re” = review; “le” = letter; “ed” = editorial; l“ch” = book chapter; = conference proceedings; * = Truncation “ “ = Citation Marks; searches for an exact phrase
Search terms Items found
Intervention:
1. TITLE-ABS-KEY ( “motivational interview*” OR “motivational counsel*” OR “motivational enhancement”) 9 793
Setting:
2. TITLE-ABS-KEY ( ( forced OR forcibl* OR compulsory OR mandatory OR mandated OR institution* OR residential OR locked ) W/3 ( care OR treat* OR setting* OR hospitali* OR psychiatr* OR unit* OR ward* OR admission OR admit* OR commit* ) ) 120 691
3. TITLE-ABS-KEY ( involuntary OR "non voluntary" OR detention OR detain* OR correctional OR forensic* OR prison* OR incarce* OR custod* OR coerc* OR institutionali* OR restraint) 544 277
4. TITLE-ABS-KEY ( ( foster; OR group OR placement ) W/2 ( care OR home* ) ) 51 114
5. 2 OR 3 OR 4 699 672
Study types: systematic reviews and meta-analysis
6. TITLE-ABS-KEY ( ( systematic W/2 review ) OR "meta analy*" OR metaanaly* ) AND (EXCLUDE (DOCTYPE, “le”) OR EXCLUDE (DOCTYPE, “ed”) OR EXCLUDE (DOCTYPE, “ch”) OR EXCLUDE (DOCTYPE, “cp”))
Combined sets:
7. 1 AND 6 [Intervention(MI) and Study type (Systematic review)] 881
8. 1 AND 5 [Intervention (MI) and Setting (Residential Care)] 500
Final result
9. 7 OR 8 1 381

PSYCINFO via EBSCO 7 Feb 2023

Title: Motivational Interviewing in residential youth care
TI = Title; AB = Abstract; SU = Keyword, exact or part (including all other fields for indexed and author keywords); DE = Exact keyword; TX = All text; MR = Methodology Nn= Near. Proximity operator retrieving terms within nwords from each other. ;* = Truncation; “ “ = Citation Marks; searches for an exact phrase
Search terms Items found
Intervention:
1. TI ( “motivational interview*” OR “motivational counsel*” OR “motivational enhancement”) ) OR AB ( “motivational interview*” OR “motivational counsel*” OR “motivational enhancement”) ) OR SU ( “motivational interview*” OR “motivational counsel*” OR “motivational enhancement”) ) 5 535
Setting:
2. (DE "Involuntary Treatment") OR (DE "Residential Care Institutions") OR (DE "Correctional Institutions") 16 127
3. TI ( ( ( forced OR forcibl* OR compulsory OR mandatory OR mandated OR institution* OR residential OR locked ) N3 ( care OR treat* OR setting* OR hospitali* OR unit* OR ward* OR admission OR admit* OR commit* OR psychiatr* ) ) ) OR SU ( ( ( forced OR forcibl* OR compulsory OR mandatory OR mandated OR institution* OR residential OR locked ) N3 ( care OR treat* OR setting* OR hospitali* OR unit* OR ward* OR admission OR admit* OR commit* OR psychiatr* ) ) ) OR AB ( ( ( forced OR forcibl* OR compulsory OR mandatory OR mandated OR institution* OR residential OR locked ) N3 ( care OR treat* OR setting* OR hospitali* OR unit* OR ward* OR admission OR admit* OR commit* OR psychiatr* ) ) ) OR TI ( ( involuntary OR "non voluntary" OR detention OR detain* OR correctional OR forensic* OR custod* OR coerc* OR institutionali* OR prison* OR incarc* OR restrain* ) ) OR SU ( ( involuntary OR "non voluntary" OR detention OR detain* OR correctional OR forensic* OR custod* OR coerc* OR institutionali* OR prison* OR incarc* OR restrain*) ) OR AB ( ( involuntary OR "non voluntary" OR detention OR detain* OR correctional OR forensic* OR custod* OR coerc* OR institutionali* OR prison* OR incarc* OR restrain*)) 166 260
4. TI ( ( ( foster OR group OR placement ) N2 ( care OR home* ) ) ) OR AB ( ( ( foster OR group OR placement ) N2 ( care OR home* ) ) ) OR SU ( ( ( foster OR group OR placement ) N2 ( care OR home* ) ) ) 22 314
5. 2 OR 3 OR 4 184 409
Study types: systematic reviews and meta-analysis
6. TI((systematic n3 review) OR "meta analys*" OR metaanalys*) OR AB((systematic n3 review) OR "meta analys*" OR metaanalys*) OR SU((systematic n3 review) OR "meta analys*" OR metaanalys*) OR (MR "Systematic Review" OR MR "meta analysis")
Combined sets:
7. 1 AND 6 [Intervention(MI) and Study type (Systematic review)] 299
8. 1 AND 5 [Intervention (MI) and Setting (Residential Care)] 325
Final result
9. 7 OR 8 624

SOCIndex via EBSCO 9 Feb 2023

Title: Motivational Interviewing in residential youth care
TI = Title; AB = Abstract; SU = Keyword, exact or part (including all other fields for indexed and author keywords); Nn = Near. Proximity operator retrieving terms within n words from each other.; * = Truncation; “ “ = Citation Marks; searches for an exact phrase
Search terms Items found
Intervention:
1. TI ( “motivational interview*” OR “motivational counsel*” OR “motivational enhancement”) ) OR AB ( “motivational interview*” OR “motivational counsel*” OR “motivational enhancement”) ) OR SU ( “motivational interview*” OR “motivational counsel*” OR “motivational enhancement”) ) 1 114
Setting:
2. TI ( ( ( forced OR forcibl* OR compulsory OR mandatory OR mandated OR institution* OR residential OR locked ) N3 ( care OR treat* OR setting* OR hospitali* OR unit* OR ward* OR admission OR admit* OR commit* OR psychiatr* ) ) ) OR SU ( ( ( forced OR forcibl* OR compulsory OR mandatory OR mandated OR institution* OR residential OR locked ) N3 ( care OR treat* OR setting* OR hospitali* OR unit* OR ward* OR admission OR admit* OR commit* OR psychiatr* ) ) ) OR AB ( ( ( forced OR forcibl* OR compulsory OR mandatory OR mandated OR institution* OR residential OR locked ) N3 ( care OR treat* OR setting* OR hospitali* OR unit* OR ward* OR admission OR admit* OR commit* OR psychiatr* ) ) ) OR TI ( ( involuntary OR "non voluntary" OR detention OR detain* OR correctional OR forensic* OR custod* OR coerc* OR institutionali* OR prison* OR incarc* OR restrain* ) ) OR SU ( ( involuntary OR "non voluntary" OR detention OR detain* OR correctional OR forensic* OR custod* OR coerc* OR institutionali* OR prison* OR incarc* OR restrain*) ) OR AB ( ( involuntary OR "non voluntary" OR detention OR detain* OR correctional OR forensic* OR custod* OR coerc* OR institutionali* OR prison* OR incarc* OR restrain*)) 130 434
3. TI ( ( ( foster OR group OR placement ) N2 ( care OR home* ) ) ) OR AB ( ( ( foster OR group OR placement ) N2 ( care OR home* ) ) ) OR SU ( ( ( foster OR group OR placement ) N2 ( care OR home* ) ) ) 12 024
4. 2 OR 3 142 610
Study types: systematic reviews and meta-analysis
5. TI((systematic N3 review) OR "meta analys*" OR metaanalys*) OR AB((systematic N3 review) OR "meta analys*" OR metaanalys*) OR SU((systematic N3 review) OR "meta analys*" OR metaanalys*)
Combined sets:
6. 1 AND 5 [Intervention(MI) and Study type (Systematic review)] 49
7. 1 AND 4 [Intervention (MI) and Setting (Residential Care)] 79
Final result
8. 6 OR 7 128

Criminal Justice Abstracts via EBSCO9 Feb 2023

Title: Motivational Interviewing in residential youth care
Search terms Items found
TI = Title; AB = Abstract; SU = Keyword, exact or part (including all other fields for indexed and author keywords); Nn = Near. Proximity operator retrieving terms within n words from each other.; * = Truncation; “ “ = Citation Marks; searches for an exact phrase
Intervention:
1. TI ( “motivational interview*” OR “motivational counsel*” OR “motivational enhancement”) ) OR AB ( “motivational interview*” OR “motivational counsel*” OR “motivational enhancement”) ) OR SU ( “motivational interview*” OR “motivational counsel*” OR “motivational enhancement”) ) 1 029
Setting:
2. TI ( ( ( forced OR forcibl* OR compulsory OR mandatory OR mandated OR institution* OR residential OR locked ) N3 ( care OR treat* OR setting* OR hospitali* OR unit* OR ward* OR admission OR admit* OR commit* OR psychiatr* ) ) ) OR SU ( ( ( forced OR forcibl* OR compulsory OR mandatory OR mandated OR institution* OR residential OR locked ) N3 ( care OR treat* OR setting* OR hospitali* OR unit* OR ward* OR admission OR admit* OR commit* OR psychiatr* ) ) ) OR AB ( ( ( forced OR forcibl* OR compulsory OR mandatory OR mandated OR institution* OR residential OR locked ) N3 ( care OR treat* OR setting* OR hospitali* OR unit* OR ward* OR admission OR admit* OR commit* OR psychiatr* ) ) ) OR TI ( ( involuntary OR "non voluntary" OR detention OR detain* OR correctional OR forensic* OR custod* OR coerc* OR institutionali* OR prison* OR incarc* OR restrain* ) ) OR SU ( ( involuntary OR "non voluntary" OR detention OR detain* OR correctional OR forensic* OR custod* OR coerc* OR institutionali* OR prison* OR incarc* OR restrain*) ) OR AB ( ( involuntary OR "non voluntary" OR detention OR detain* OR correctional OR forensic* OR custod* OR coerc* OR institutionali* OR prison* OR incarc* OR restrain*)) 99 000
3. TI ( ( ( foster OR group OR placement ) N2 ( care OR home* ) ) ) OR AB ( ( ( foster OR group OR placement ) N2 ( care OR home* ) ) ) OR SU ( ( ( foster OR group OR placement ) N2 ( care OR home* ) ) ) 3 496
4. 2 OR 3 101 592
Study types: systematic reviews and meta-analysis
5. TI((systematic N3 review) OR "meta analys*" OR metaanalys*) OR AB((systematic N3 review) OR "meta analys*" OR metaanalys*) OR SU((systematic N3 review) OR "meta analys*" OR metaanalys*)
Combined sets:
6. 1 AND 5 [Intervention(MI) and Study type (Systematic review)] 62
7. 1 AND 4 [Intervention (MI) and Setting (Residential Care)] 105
Final result
8. 6 OR 7 167

Bilaga 2 Flödesschema för urval av artiklar

Av 3544 artiklar lästes 47 i fulltext. Fyra primärstudier inkluderades

Bilaga 3 Exkluderade artiklar

Artiklar som exkluderats efter fulltextläsning på grund av bristande relevans/Articles excluded after full text assessment of relevance

Sökning A / Search strategy A
Excluded articles Reason for exclusion
Systematic reviews 
Barnett E, Sussman S, Smith C, Rohrbach LA, Spruijt-Metz D. Motivational Interviewing for adolescent substance use: A review of the literature. Addict Behav. 2012;37(12):1325-34. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addbeh.2012.07.001. Wrong population
Calabria B, Shakeshaft AP, Havard A. A systematic and methodological review of interventions for young people experiencing alcohol-related harm. Addiction. 2011;106(8):1406-18. Available from: https://doi.org/doi:10.1111/j.1360-0443.2011.03418.x. One study with relevant combination of population and intervention, results not reported separately.
Calomarde-Gómez C, Jiménez-Fernández B, Balcells-Oliveró M, Gual A, López-Pelayo H. Motivational Interviewing for Cannabis Use Disorders: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Eur Addict Res. 2021;27(6):413-27. Available from: https://doi.org/doi:10.1159/000515667. Wrong population
Jensen CD, Cushing CC, Aylward BS, Craig JT, Sorell DM, Steele RG. Effectiveness of motivational interviewing interventions for adolescent substance use behavior change: a meta-analytic review. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2011;79(4):433-40. Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0023992. Wrong population
Li L, Zhu S, Tse N, Tse S, Wong P. Effectiveness of motivational interviewing to reduce illicit drug use in adolescents: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Addiction. 2016;111(5):795-805. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/add.13285. Wrong population
Martin J, Liddell M, Roberts S, Greenwood E. Effective therapeutic interventions for Australian adolescents using alcohol and/or other drugs: a scoping review. Int. 2020;14(1). Available from: https://doi.org/doi:10.1186/s13033-020-00425-z. Wrong publication type
Wrong population
Richmond A, Borden LM. Motivational interviewing: An approach to support youth aging out of foster care. J Soc Work (Lond). 2021;21(4):970-85. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1177/1468017320920176. Wrong publication type
Wrong population
Steele DW, Becker SJ, Danko KJ, Balk EM, Adam GP, Saldanha IJ, et al. Brief behavioral interventions for substance use in adolescents: A meta-analysis. Pediatrics. 2020;146(4). Available from: https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2020-0351. Wrong population
Primary studies
Clair M, Stein LA, Soenksen S, Martin RA, Lebeau R, Golembeske C. Ethnicity as a moderator of motivational interviewing for incarcerated adolescents after release. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2013;45(4):370-5. Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jsat.2013.05.006. Article from same primary study as included articles.
Limited transferability.
Lincour P, Kuettel TJ, Bombardier CH. Motivational interviewing in a group setting with mandated clients: a pilot study. Addict Behav. 2002;27(3):381-91. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/s0306-4603(01)00179-4. Wrong population, outpatient treatment.
Stein LA, Monti PM, Colby SM, Barnett NP, Golembeske C, Lebeau-Craven R, et al. Enhancing Substance Abuse Treatment Engagement in Incarcerated Adolescents. Psychol Serv. 2006;3(1):25-34. Article from same primary study as included articles.
Wrong outcome.
Stein LAR, Martin R, Clair-Michaud M, Lebeau R, Hurlbut W, Kahler CW, et al. A randomized clinical trial of motivational interviewing plus skills training vs Relaxation plus education and 12-steps for substance using incarcerated youth: Effects on alcohol, Marijuana and crimes of aggression. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2020;207. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2019.107774. Wrong intervention

 

Sökning B / Search strategy B
Excluded articles Reason for exclusion
Ahankari AS, Wray J, Jomeen J, Hayter M. The effectiveness of combined alcohol and sexual risk taking reduction interventions on the sexual behaviour of teenagers and young adults: a systematic review. Public Health. 2019;173. Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.puhe.2019.05.023. Wrong population
Wrong intervention
Armelius B-Å, Andreassen TH. Cognitive-Behavioral Treatment for Antisocial Behavior in Youth in Residential Treatment. Campbell Syst Rev. 2007;3(1):1-57. Available from: https://doi.org/10.4073/csr.2007.8. Wrong intervention
Beaudry G, Yu R, Perry AE, Fazel S. Effectiveness of psychological interventions in prison to reduce recidivism: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Lancet Psychiatry. 2021;8(9). Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S2215-0366(21)00170-X. Wrong intervention
Brazão N, da Motta C, Rijo D. From multimodal programs to a new cognitive–interpersonal approach in the rehabilitation of offenders. Aggression Violent Behav. 2013;18(6). Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2013.07.018. Wrong intervention
Davis JP. Effect of mindfulness based relapse prevention on developmental trends, stress, and substance use among young adults in residential substance use treatment: A randomized controlled trial. ProQuest Information & Learning; 2019. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences. Wrong publication type, dissertation
Wrong intervention
De Swart JJW, Van den Broek H, Stams GJJM, Asscher JJ, Van der Laan PH, Holsbrink-Engels GA, et al. The effectiveness of institutional youth care over the past three decades: A meta-analysis. Child Youth Serv Rev. 2012;34(9). Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2012.05.015. Wrong intervention
Donkoh C, Underhill K, Montgomery P. Independent Living Programmes for Improving Outcomes for Young People Leaving the Care System. Campbell Syst Rev. 2006;2(1):1-34. Available from: https://doi.org/10.4073/csr.2006.8. Wrong intervention
Wrong population
Doucet MM, Greeson JKP, Eldeeb N. Independent living programs and services for youth 'aging out' of care in Canada and the US: A systematic review. Child Youth Serv Rev. 2022;142. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2022.106630. Wrong intervention
Wrong population
Eadeh H-M, Breaux R, Nikolas MA. A meta-analytic review of emotion regulation focused psychosocial interventions for adolescents. Clin Child Family Psychol Rev. 2021;24(4). Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10567-021-00362-4. Wrong intervention
Wrong population
Elliott L, Orr L, Watson L, Jackson A. Secondary prevention interventions for young drug users: a systematic review of the evidence. Adolescence. 2005;40(157). Wrong intervention
Wrong population
Everson‐Hock ES, Jones R, Guillaume L, Clapton J, Duenas A, Goyder E, et al. Supporting the transition of looked‐after young people to independent living: A systematic review of interventions and adult outcomes. Child Care Health Dev. 2011;37(6). Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2214.2011.01287.x. Wrong intervention
Wrong population
Gagnon JC, Benedick AR, Mason-Williams L. Mental health interventions for youth who are incarcerated: A systematic review of literature. Am J Orthopsychiatry. 2022;92(4). Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ort0000587. Wrong intervention
Gagnon JC, Ruiz E, Mathur SR, Mason-Williams L. Interventions addressing incarcerated youth behavior: A review of literature. Am J Orthopsychiatry. 2022;92(4). Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ort0000621. Wrong intervention
Grietens H, Hellinckx W. Evaluating effects of residential treatment for juvenile offenders by statistical metaanalysis: A review. Aggression Violent Behav. 2004;9(4). Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1359-1789(03)00043-0. Wrong publication type
Wrong intervention
Hambrick EP, Oppenheim-Weller S, N'Zi A M, Taussig HN. Mental Health Interventions for Children in Foster Care: A Systematic Review. Child Youth Serv Rev. 2016;70. Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2016.09.002. Wrong population
Wrong intervention
Hammarstrom S, Stenqvist K, Lindroth M. Sexual health interventions for young people in state care: a systematic review. Scand J Public Health. 2018;46(8). Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1403494818783077. Wrong intervention
Howey W, Lundahl B, Assadollahi A. Effectiveness of Residential Treatment for Juveniles with Problematic Sexual Behavior: A Systematic Review. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022;19(23). Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192315625. Wrong intervention
James S, Alemi Q, Zepeda V. Effectiveness and implementation of evidence-based practices in residential care settings. Child Youth Serv Rev. 2013;35(4). Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2013.01.007. Wrong intervention
Jones C, Nonas-Barnes L. Effectiveness of Skills Groups for Adolescents in Correctional Settings: A Scientific Systematic Review. Columbia Social Work Review (Columbia University School of Social Work). 2017;8. Wrong intervention
Kemmis-Riggs J, Dickes A, McAloon J. Program Components of Psychosocial Interventions in Foster and Kinship Care: A Systematic Review. Clin Child Fam Psychol Rev. 2018;21(1). Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10567-017-0247-0. Wrong intervention
Wrong population
Kvamme LS, Waaler P, Helland SS, Kjobli J. Striving for Happily Ever After: Supportive Interventions for Youth Leaving Residential Placement. A Systematic Review of Reviews. Child Adolesc Ment Health. 2022;27(4). Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/camh.12507. Wrong publication type
Wrong intervention
Wrong population
Lanier P, Jensen T, Bryant K, Chung G, Rose R, Smith Q, et al. A systematic review of the effectiveness of children’s behavioral health interventions in psychiatric residential treatment facilities. Child Youth Serv Rev. 2020;113. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.104951. Wrong intervention
Leipoldt JD, Harder AT, Kayed NS, Grietens H, Rimehaug T. Determinants and outcomes of social climate in therapeutic residential youth care: A systematic review. Child Youth Serv Rev. 2019;99. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2019.02.010. Wrong focus
MacLean S, Cameron J, Harney A, Lee NK. Psychosocial therapeutic interventions for volatile substance use: a systematic review. Addiction. 2012;107(2). Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1360-0443.2011.03650.x. Wrong intervention
Wrong population
Mak C, Whittingham K, Cunnington R, Boyd RN. Efficacy of mindfulness-based interventions for attention and executive function in children and adolescents—A systematic review. Mindfulness. 2018;9(1). Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-017-0770-6. Wrong intervention
Wrong population
Reitzel LR, Carbonell JL. The effectiveness of sexual offender treatment for juveniles as measured by recidivism: A meta-analysis. Sex Abuse J Res Treat. 2006;18(4). Available from: https://doi.org/10.1177/107906320601800407. Wrong intervention
Robert A, Illa JM, Navarro ME. The therapeutic community for substance use disorders among adolescents. Trastor Adict. 2012;14(4). Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1575-0973(12)70054-5. Wrong language - spanish
Salas AP. Effectiveness of aggression replacement training on the treatment of adolescent aggression: A meta-analysis. 2020. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering. Wrong publication type – dissertation
Wrong intervention
Tripodi SJ, Bender K. Substance abuse treatment for juvenile offenders: A review of quasi-experimental and experimental research. J Crim Justice. 2011;39(3). Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2011.02.007. Wrong intervention