69 Randomized controlled trial of a social network intervention 3 only a minority (32.3%) of the forensic interventions (Wartna, Alberda, & Verweij, 2013b). Nevertheless, forensic (F)ACT is a well described and promising multimodal treatment model that meets the complex needs of forensic patients in clinical practice. In order to further improve treatment effectiveness for this vulnerable group, working mechanisms of the current (multimodal) forensic treatments models should be studied extensively. Hence, more RCTs are necessary to develop specific evidence-based interventions (MacKenzie & Farrington, 2015). Social network-related problems of forensic psychiatric populations are considered one of the important targets within treatment (Bootsma, van den Berg, & Spreen, 2017; Lindqvist & Skipworth, 2000; Pettus-Davis et al., 2011). A substantial part of the social network of forensic patients is engaged in criminal activities or consists of network members with psychiatric problems and substance (ab)use (Skeem et al., 2009; ter Haar-Pomp et al., 2015). Also enhanced levels of loneliness are observed in prison and forensic inpatient populations (Kao et al., 2014; Murphy, 2000). Both the absence of social support and the presence of a criminal social network of family and friends has been related to increased criminal behavior (Andrews & Bonta, 1995; Cottle, Lee, & Heilbrun, 2001; Durant, Knight, & Goodman, 1997). Indeed, a supportive social network – a network of personal contacts that contribute to a social identity, new contacts and provide emotional, instrumental, and material support (Walker, MacBride, & Vachon, 1977) – has been postulated as an important protective factor against criminal recidivism (Berg & Huebner, 2011). As such, strong social support, stable contact with positive peers and social ties with prosocial adults are related to less criminal recidivism rates (Berg & Huebner, 2011; Bouman, de Ruiter, & Schene, 2010; Lodewijks et al., 2010). Until now, systematic reviews showed that social network interventions lead to health behavior improvements in general populations (Hunter et al., 2019). Among psychiatric populations, social network interventions focused on network-related problems and family relationships, can lead to improved mental wellbeing and a better use of mental health services (Kawachi & Berkman, 2001; Pinto, 2006). Despite these results and the positive influence of social support on criminal recidivism, social support interventions are not actively applied (in addition to treatment as usual) in forensic populations (Duwe, 2018a; Pettus-Davis et al., 2011). Moreover, RCTs and other evaluative studies that examine the effectiveness of social network interventions in forensic psychiatric populations are scarce. One pilot RCT that compared a short group social support intervention with a general reentry service among a small sample of recently released prisoners, found no statistically significant group effects for social support, cognitions,
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjY0ODMw