Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Detecting intimate partner violence during pregnancy: awareness-raising indicators for use by primary healthcare professionals.
Public Health. 2008 Jul; 122(7):716-24.PH

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Given the deleterious consequences of intimate partner violence (IPV) for gestation, it is important to promote a more effective and amicable approach that engenders greater receptiveness, stimulates more open communication and, ultimately, facilitates addressing the problem. In this regard, active primary care professionals need to be educated about the different profiles of violence found in domestic environments. The aim of this study is to make the identification of those subgroups of pregnant women most likely to be living in IPV situations both practical and simple. Its ultimate goal is to give healthcare professionals who work directly with the public the tools to anticipate such events. To this end, this study presents a profile of IPV during pregnancy according to different characteristics observed among primary health service users.

METHODS

Five hundred and twenty-seven women who carried children to term in Rio de Janeiro were interviewed. A Portuguese version of the Revised Conflict Tactics Scale (CTS2) was used to detect IPV. Several sociodemographic factors, life habits and reproductive health characteristics of pregnant women and their partners were scrutinized. Prevalence projections by subgroup were obtained using a multinomial logit model.

RESULTS

The projected prevalences for negotiation, psychological violence, minor physical violence and severe physical violence were, respectively, 0.1% [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.0-0.6], 2.6% (95%CI 0.7-6.9), 7.0% (95%CI 1.7-18.5) and 90.3% (95%CI 77.2-96.8) for the extreme scenario, i.e. women <20 years of age, non-White, living in house with inadequate garbage disposal, previous history of abortion, reporting fear of someone, reporting lack of affective social support, and reporting drug use by woman or spouse. In the absence of these characteristics, the projected prevalences were 51.3% (95%CI 38.5-64.6), 40.0% (95%CI 28.5-51.9), 7.6% (95%CI 4.2-12.7) and 1.1% (95%CI 0.3-2.4), respectively.

CONCLUSION

This study found that knowledge of certain characteristics of pregnant women who attend health services can alert professionals to the high probability of IPV, facilitating early identification of the problem and subsequent implementation of proactive measures.

Authors+Show Affiliations

Institute of Social Medicine, Rio de Janeiro State University, Rua São Francisco Xavier, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil. Michael@ims.uerj.brNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info available

Pub Type(s)

Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Language

eng

PubMed ID

18222507

Citation

Reichenheim, Michael Eduardo, et al. "Detecting Intimate Partner Violence During Pregnancy: Awareness-raising Indicators for Use By Primary Healthcare Professionals." Public Health, vol. 122, no. 7, 2008, pp. 716-24.
Reichenheim ME, Patricio TF, Moraes CL. Detecting intimate partner violence during pregnancy: awareness-raising indicators for use by primary healthcare professionals. Public Health. 2008;122(7):716-24.
Reichenheim, M. E., Patricio, T. F., & Moraes, C. L. (2008). Detecting intimate partner violence during pregnancy: awareness-raising indicators for use by primary healthcare professionals. Public Health, 122(7), 716-24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.puhe.2007.09.016
Reichenheim ME, Patricio TF, Moraes CL. Detecting Intimate Partner Violence During Pregnancy: Awareness-raising Indicators for Use By Primary Healthcare Professionals. Public Health. 2008;122(7):716-24. PubMed PMID: 18222507.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Detecting intimate partner violence during pregnancy: awareness-raising indicators for use by primary healthcare professionals. AU - Reichenheim,Michael Eduardo, AU - Patricio,Tatiane Ferreira, AU - Moraes,Claudia Leite, Y1 - 2008/01/28/ PY - 2007/02/13/received PY - 2007/08/13/revised PY - 2007/09/28/accepted PY - 2008/1/29/pubmed PY - 2008/10/17/medline PY - 2008/1/29/entrez SP - 716 EP - 24 JF - Public health JO - Public Health VL - 122 IS - 7 N2 - BACKGROUND: Given the deleterious consequences of intimate partner violence (IPV) for gestation, it is important to promote a more effective and amicable approach that engenders greater receptiveness, stimulates more open communication and, ultimately, facilitates addressing the problem. In this regard, active primary care professionals need to be educated about the different profiles of violence found in domestic environments. The aim of this study is to make the identification of those subgroups of pregnant women most likely to be living in IPV situations both practical and simple. Its ultimate goal is to give healthcare professionals who work directly with the public the tools to anticipate such events. To this end, this study presents a profile of IPV during pregnancy according to different characteristics observed among primary health service users. METHODS: Five hundred and twenty-seven women who carried children to term in Rio de Janeiro were interviewed. A Portuguese version of the Revised Conflict Tactics Scale (CTS2) was used to detect IPV. Several sociodemographic factors, life habits and reproductive health characteristics of pregnant women and their partners were scrutinized. Prevalence projections by subgroup were obtained using a multinomial logit model. RESULTS: The projected prevalences for negotiation, psychological violence, minor physical violence and severe physical violence were, respectively, 0.1% [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.0-0.6], 2.6% (95%CI 0.7-6.9), 7.0% (95%CI 1.7-18.5) and 90.3% (95%CI 77.2-96.8) for the extreme scenario, i.e. women <20 years of age, non-White, living in house with inadequate garbage disposal, previous history of abortion, reporting fear of someone, reporting lack of affective social support, and reporting drug use by woman or spouse. In the absence of these characteristics, the projected prevalences were 51.3% (95%CI 38.5-64.6), 40.0% (95%CI 28.5-51.9), 7.6% (95%CI 4.2-12.7) and 1.1% (95%CI 0.3-2.4), respectively. CONCLUSION: This study found that knowledge of certain characteristics of pregnant women who attend health services can alert professionals to the high probability of IPV, facilitating early identification of the problem and subsequent implementation of proactive measures. SN - 0033-3506 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/18222507/Detecting_intimate_partner_violence_during_pregnancy:_awareness_raising_indicators_for_use_by_primary_healthcare_professionals_ DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -