Back to Search Start Over

A Randomized Wait-List Controlled Trial of Men in Mind: Enhancing Mental Health Practitioners' Self-Rated Clinical Competencies to Work With Men.

Authors :
Seidler, Zac E.
Wilson, Michael J.
Benakovic, Ruben
Mackinnon, Andrew
Oliffe, John L.
Ogrodniczuk, John S.
Kealy, David
Owen, Jesse
Pirkis, Jane
Mihalopoulos, Cathy
Long Khanh-Dao Le
Rice, Simon M.
Source :
American Psychologist. Mar2024, Vol. 79 Issue 3, p423-436. 14p.
Publication Year :
2024

Abstract

Improved engagement of men in psychotherapy is an essential element in improving male health outcomes. This trial examined whether the Men in Mind intervention improved practitioners' self-rated clinical competencies to engage and respond to male clients in therapy. A parallel, single-blind, wait-list randomized controlled trial was conducted with Australian- based mental health practitioners, currently administering psychotherapy to males, fluent in English, and not currently completing their undergraduate degree. Participants were randomly assigned 1:1, through variable-sized blocks stratified by gender, to either the intervention (Men inMind) or wait-list control.Men inMind was offered as a self-led 6-week, five-module online program to upskill practitioners to engage and respond to male clients. The primary outcome was self-reported competency in engaging men in psychotherapy, measured by the Engaging Men in Therapy Scale (EMITS) at 6 weeks. All analyses were by intention-to-treat. Between January 16 and March 17, 2022, 587 participants were randomly assigned to the intervention (n = 300) or wait-list control (n = 287). In total, 492 (84%) participants completed the primary endpoint assessment at 6 weeks. Men in Mind demonstrated a large effect of improved EMITS scores compared to the control group (d = 2.63, 95% CI [2.39, 2.87], p < .001). Men in Mind was effective at increasing mental health practitioners' self-reported efficacy to work with men, which is potentially a key change mechanism in their ability to improve health outcomes for male clients. A limitation of the trial was the use of a bespoke, self-reported primary outcome, while a strength was the gender-responsive intervention design. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
0003066X
Volume :
79
Issue :
3
Database :
Academic Search Index
Journal :
American Psychologist
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
176646564
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0001242