Prevalence Of Lifetime Intimate Partner Violence Research Articles

The prevalence of intimate partner violence and risk factors for women and men in China during the Shanghai 2022 lockdown.

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a global public health concern with negative effects on individuals and families. The present study investigated the prevalence, risk factors and gender disparities associated with IPV during the Shanghai 2022 Covid-19 lockdown - a public health emergency which may have exacerbated IPV. We estimated the total IPV prevalence and prevalence of physical, sexual and verbal IPV by using an adapted version of the Extended-Hurt, Insult, Threaten, Scream scale. This cross-sectional study was carried out using a population quota-based sampling of Shanghai residents across 16 districts during the 2022 Shanghai lockdown (N = 2026; 1058 men and 968 women). We found a distinct gendered dynamic, where women reported a significantly higher prevalence of experienced IPV (27.1%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 23.1-31.4) compared to men (19.8%, 95% CI: 16.1-24.0). Notably, the prevalence estimate mirrored the national lifetime IPV prevalence for women but was over twice as high for men. In multivariable logistic regression analyses, economic stress (income loss: adjusted OR [aOR] = 2.42, 95% CI: 1.28-4.56; job loss: aOR = 1.73, 95% CI: 1.02-2.92; financial worry much more than usual: aOR = 1.89, 95% CI: 1.00-3.57) and household burden (one child at home: aOR = 1.81, 95% CI: 1.12-2.92; not enough food: aOR = 1.67, 95% CI: 1.04-2.70) were associated with increased odds of overall IPV victimization among women but not men. With regard to more serious forms of IPV, job loss (aOR = 2.27, 95% CI: 1.09-4.69) and household burden (two or more children at home: aOR = 2.95, 95% CI: 1.33-7.69) were associated with increased odds of physical IPV against men. For women, a lack of household supplies was associated with increased odds of physical IPV (water: aOR = 3.33, 95% CI: 1.79-6.25; daily supplies: aOR = 2.27, 95% CI: 1.18-4.35). Lack of daily supplies (aOR = 2.17, 95% CI: 1.03-4.55) and job loss (aOR = 2.66, 95% CI: 1.16-6.12) were also associated with increased odds of sexual IPV. Although a larger proportion of women reported IPV, men experienced greater IPV during the lockdown than previously estimated before the pandemic. Economic stressors, including job loss, and household burden were critical risk factors for serious forms of IPV. Improving gender equality that my account for disparities in IPV in China is critically needed. Policies that mitigate the impact of economic losses during crises can potentially reduce IPV.

Ugandan Men Exposed to Intimate Partner Violence: A Cross-Sectional Survey of Nationally Representative Data

Although women typically constitute the largest proportion of the population who experience the deleterious effects of intimate partner violence (IPV), understanding the bidirectional nature of IPV is important for developing nuanced prevention initiatives. This study examines data from the 2016 Ugandan Demographic and Health Survey. Participants were selected from households in all the 15 regions in Uganda using a two stage sampling design. A total of 2858 men who were in a heterosexual union or separated/divorced were included in the analysis. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed with the aim of identifying associations between selected demographic variables and male exposure to all forms of IPV combined, psychological violence, physical violence and sexual violence. The prevalence of lifetime IPV and during the 12 months preceeding the survey respectively was 43.6 and 30.5% in all forms, with 35.9 and 24.8% reporting psychological, 20.2 and 11.9% for physical and 8.2 and 5.7% sexual violence. The key factors associated with all forms of IPV were being afraid of their wife/partner most of the time (OR = 5.10, 95% CI 2.91, 8.96) controlling behaviour of the intimate partner (OR = 3.80, 95% CI 2.84, 5.07), bi-directional violence against the partner (OR = 3.20, 95% CI 2.49, 4.12), alcohol consumption by the intimate partner (OR = 1.85, 95% CI 1.40, 2.45). The factors associated with males who experience IPV appear to be modifiable and may warrant consideration for inclusion in programs supporting both males and females who experience IPV.

Intimate Partner Violence and its Associated Factors among Women of Reproductive Age in Nepal: Findings from a National Cross-Sectional Survey

Introduction: In Nepal, Intimate partner violence (IPV) is quite common among women. Several factors can play a role for the incidence of intimate partner violence. The aim of the study was to assess the prevalence of lifetime IPV and last 12 months and associated factors among Nepalese women of reproductive age.
 Methods: The Nepal Demographic and Health Survey 2016 data was used for secondary data analysis. In the study, a total of 3,826 women of reproductive age were included. Intimate partner violence was measured as reporting of physical and/ or sexual and/or emotional violence ever experienced in her lifetime as well as in the last 12 months. Descriptive statistics, chi-square test, bivariate and multivariate logistic regression were computed.
 Results: Overall, 25.7% women have experienced lifetime intimate partner violence, with 22.1% physical, 7.8% sexual and 12.7% emotional violence. Findings from multivariate logistic regression showed that women belonging to lower caste (Adjusted Odds Ratio(AOR):1.41, 95% Cofidence Interval(CI)=1.07-1.85), with no education (AOR:1.95, 95%CI=1.36- 2.79), with 3-5 number of children (AOR:1.57,95%CI=1.04-2.35), whose husband had no education (AOR:1.84,95% CI=1.27-2.66), whose husbands drank alcohol (AOR:2.54,95%CI=2.14-3.02) and the women who witness fathers beating their mothers (AOR:2.25,95%CI=1.81-2.78) were more likely suffering from intimate partner violence.
 Conclusion: Intimate partner violence has been linked to socio-demographic factors, substance abuse, and previous experience of witnessing fathers beating their mothers. In Nepal, equal access to education for both men and women, prohibition of caste-based discrimination and prevention of substance abuse may be effective strategies for reducing intimate partner violence.

Factors associated with intimate partner violence and barriers to reporting it, among female who use drugs in Malaysia

Females who use drugs (FWUDs) are vulnerable to intimate partner violence (IPV). This study was initiated to identify factors that evoke IPV, and identify barriers that preclude FWUDs from seeking help. Two-hundred FWUDs were recruited from a mandatory drug rehabilitation centre (CCRC) for this cross-sectional study. The data were collected through face-to-face interviews using a semi-structured questionnaire. The majority in our sample was Malay (86%, n = 171/200), and their mean age was 32.3 years (SD = 8.61). The lifetime IPV prevalence rate in the sample was 53% (n = 105/200), far exceeding the reported rate for non-drug dependent married women in Malaysia. The prevalence rates for physical, psychological, and sexual violence in the sample were 41%, 29%, and 24%, respectively. Lifetime IPV incidence among FWUDs was associated with living away from parents/family, having a regular intimate male partner who uses drugs, and having been a victim of underage rape. The main reasons for not reporting IPV were the lack of knowledge of one’s rights, not knowing how to access legal counsel, and the fear of retaliation from one’s partner. Our findings may be useful in designing interventions to minimize the occurrence of IPV and promote the seeking of assistance and treatment by FWUDs.

Association between intimate partner violence & HIV/AIDS: Exploring the pathways in Indian context.

Background & objectives:Violence against women cutting across diverse socio-economic classes is an under-recognized human rights violation in the world. This analysis was undertaken to examine the prevalence along with predictors of intimate partner violence (IPV) and its association with HIV/AIDS and sexually transmitted infections (STIs) in Indian ever-married women.Methods:The data obtained from 2005 to 2006 third round of National Family Health Survey-3 (NFHS-3) were used in this study. Analyses were conducted on ever-married women by linking individual women data including violence information and HIV test results.Results:The analyses indicated all forms of violence to be prevalent in India. The prevalence of lifetime IPV reported was 35.3 per cent. Multivariate analysis using logistic regression identified younger age of women, higher number of children, low level of education of women as well as her partner, working status of women, higher spousal age, rural residence, alcohol consumption by husband, childhood witness of violence among parents, nuclear household and lower standard of living to be positively associated with the experience of IPV by the women (P<0.05). HIV-positive status of women, as well as women from high HIV prevalent State, were at increased odds of IPV (P<0.05).Interpretation & conclusions:Significantly higher reporting of HIV/STIs by women experiencing IPV hints at new pathways that link violence and HIV. Further, our analysis showed a high prevalence of IPV in India.

Intimate partner violence in the young cohort of the Australian longitudinal study on women's health: urban/rural comparison and demographic associations

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is known to be linked to significant negative physical and mental health outcomes. This study addresses a gap in the Australian IPV literature by investigating lifetime IPV prevalence by rurality of residence, using data from a population-based sample of young women. The overall lifetime IPV prevalence rate in the sample was 21.6%, but there were significant differences in IPV rates from major cities (19.6%), inner regional areas (24.4%) and other rural areas (26.1%). After adjusting for demographic variables, multivariable analysis revealed that there were still significantly raised odds of women from inner regional (OR 1.16, 95% CI 1.01–1.33) and other rural areas (OR 1.31, 95% CI 1.11–1.56) reporting lifetime IPV compared to women from major cities. Multivariable analysis also showed that a history of IPV was significantly associated with women being separated/divorced/widowed, having lower levels of education, income hardship and limited available social support.

Intimate Partner Violence in Older Women in Spain: Prevalence, Health Consequences, and Service Utilization

The purpose of this study is to estimate the prevalence of lifetime intimate partner violence (IPV) in older women and to analyze its effect on women's health and Healthcare Services utilization. Women aged 55 years and over (1,676) randomly sampled from Primary Healthcare Services around Spain were included. Lifetime IPV prevalence, types, and duration were calculated. Descriptive and multivariate procedures using logistic and multiple lineal regression models were used. Of the women studied, 29.4% experienced IPV with an average duration of 21 years. Regardless of the type of IPV experienced, abused women showed significantly poorer health and higher healthcare services utilization compared to women who had never been abused. The high prevalence detected long standing duration, negative health impact, and high healthcare services utilization, calling attention to a need for increased efforts aimed at addressing IPV in older women.

Prevalência da violência praticada por parceiro masculino entre mulheres usuárias da rede primária de saúde do Estado de São Paulo

To evaluate the prevalence and factors associated with intimate partner violence (IPV) among women users of Basic Health Units (BHU) in the State of São Paulo.This was a cross-sectional descriptive study based on secondary data analysis of women users' interviews at 75 BHU in the State of São Paulo, from August/2008 to May/2009. We used a questionnaire based on the Abuse Assessment Screen and the Conflict Tactics Scales modified by the Violence Against Women Study (VAW), structured and pre-tested. The variables studied were the types of IPV (psychological, physical and sexual) and sociodemographic variables (age, education, race, paid work, religion, marital status and economic class). We interviewed 2,379 women aged 18 to 60 years.The prevalence of lifetime IPV was 55.7%, and the prevalences of psychological, physical and sexual IPV were 53.8, 32.2 and 12.4%, respectively. Women without a partner but previously married, with schooling <8 years and belonging to the lower economic class had a higher risk for all types of IPV, and other factors were also associated with psychological and sexual IPV.The prevalence of IPV is high. Healthcare professionals in primary care should make an attempt to detect IPV.

Taking a Fresh Look at Routine Screening for Intimate Partner Violence: What Can We Do About What We Know?

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is defined as “any behavior within an intimate relationship that causes physical, psychological or sexual harm to those in the relationship.”1 Its role as a major public health issue affecting both men and women, regardless of social class, sexual orientation, or racial/ethnic group, was reinforced by the recently released population-based 2010 National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey.2 Results indicate that women have a lifetime IPV prevalence rate of 29%, with 1 in 7 injured by an intimate partner. With a lifetime prevalence rate of 10% (1 in 25 injured as a result of IPV),2 men are significantly less likely than women to experience physical or sexual IPV.3 While less is known about the long-term impact of IPV among male victims, both male and female victims of IPV experience high rates of adverse physical, social, emotional, and mental health outcomes.2-5 Being a victim of IPV is strongly associated with a host of behavioral risks such as sexually transmitted diseases, human immunodeficiency virus infection, and the use of tobacco, alcohol, and drugs and is linked to all other forms of violence.1 As a significant contributor to health, social, and economic disparities, IPV jeopardizes the fabric of families and transcends all levels of socioeconomic status. Due to high rates of health care utilization by both victims and perpetrators of IPV,6,7 health care settings have abundant opportunities for early identification, intervention, and secondary prevention of IPV—but have consistently failed in these endeavors.

Prevalence of Rural Intimate Partner Violence in 16 US States, 2005

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a public health problem that affects people across the entire social spectrum. However, no previous population-based public health studies have examined the prevalence of IPV in rural areas of the United States. Research on IPV in rural areas is especially important given that there are relatively fewer resources available in rural areas for the prevention of IPV. In 2005, over 25,000 rural residents in 16 states completed the first-ever IPV module within the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS). The BRFSS is a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention-sponsored annual random-digit-dialed telephone survey. The BRFSS provides surveillance of health behaviors and health risks among the non-institutionalized adult population of the United States and several US territories. Overall, 26.7% of rural women and 15.5% of rural men reported some form of lifetime IPV victimization, similar to the prevalence found among men and women in non-rural areas. Within several states, those living in rural areas evidenced significantly higher lifetime IPV prevalence than those in non-rural areas. IPV is a significant public health problem in rural areas, affecting a similar portion of the population as in non-rural areas. More research is needed to examine how the experience of IPV is different for rural and non-rural residents.

Physical and sexual intimate partner violence and reported serious psychological distress in the 2007 BRFSS

We sought to determine the relationship between intimate partner violence (IPV) and serious psychological distress (SPD) as measured by the Kessler-6 (K6) among U.S. adults. We used data from the 2007 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) to determine whether individuals who reported multiple forms of IPV also reported higher prevalences of SPD compared with those who reported: 1) no physical or sexual IPV; 2) physical or sexual IPV only; and 3) threatened or attempted physical IPV. We also obtained adjusted prevalences for lifetime physical or sexual IPV. We analyzed responses from three states that administered both the IPV and the K6 optional modules of the BRFSS in 2007. Respondents (5,985 men; 9,335 women) were categorized as experiencing threatened or attempted physical violence, physical violence, sexual violence, or both physical and sexual violence. We calculated lifetime IPV prevalence by demographic characteristics and performed adjusted and unadjusted logistic regressions of the relationship between level of IPV and SPD. 15.5 % of the sample reported some form of IPV. The prevalence of any IPV was almost twice as high in women (19.9 %) as in men (10.9 %). IPV was also associated with age, marital status, employment status, and income. Overall, the estimated prevalence of SPD was 2.9 % (95 % CI: 2.5-3.5). Among women, it was 2.1 % (95 % CI: 1.16-2.8) among those with no lifetime IPV and 15.4 % (95 % CI: 10.9-21.3) among those who reported both physical and sexual IPV. IPV is a serious public health problem associated with multiple adverse health outcomes, including SPD. In our study, the odds of SPD increased when respondents experience multiple forms of IPV. Medical and mental health practitioners should consider assessing exposure to IPV when patients have signs or symptoms of SPD or other conditions that might be consistent with IPV. Similarly, practitioners should consider assessing for IPV among patients with SPD. States should consider obtaining population-based IPV prevalence via the BRFSS to better plan for the health needs of their residents.

Intimate Partner Violence in Latina and Non-Latina Women

No single study has delineated the prevalence of intimate partner violence (IPV) over multiple time periods for Latina versus non-Latina women and compared the health of abused Latina women to the health of abused non-Latina women using multiple health indicators. The objective of this study was to describe the prevalence of IPV over multiple time periods and the association between lifetime IPV exposure and current health in Latina and non-Latina women. A total of 3429 women (mean age=47 years) were randomly sampled from a large U.S. healthcare system; 139 (4%) were Latina. During a telephone survey, past-5-year and past-year IPV prevalence was assessed using five questions on physical and psychological abuse from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS), and ten questions from the Women's Experience with Battering Scale; lifetime IPV prevalence was assessed using the BRFSS questions. Current physical, social, and mental health was assessed using well-validated questionnaires. Prevalence of IPV for Latina versus non-Latina women was, respectively: 44.6% vs 44% lifetime; 20.1% vs 14.5% for the past 5 years; and 11.5% vs 7.8% for the past year. In models adjusted for age and income, women with a lifetime IPV history had significantly worse health compared to non-abused women across many health indicators; for example, Latina women with a lifetime IPV history had Short Form-36 Health Survey (SF-36) subscale scores that were 5.62 (mental health) to 7.77 (vitality) points lower than those for non-abused Latina women; depression prevalence more than two times higher; and more physical symptoms. Adverse IPV-related health was significantly worse for Latina than non-Latina women for overall mental health functioning (p<0.02), vitality (p<0.01), and emotional functioning (p<0.01) according to SF-36. This exploratory study showed that IPV is common in Latina and non-Latina women, and adverse IPV-related mental health was pronounced in Latina women.

Intimate Partner Violence and Mental Health Consequences in Women Attending Family Practice in Spain

Despite the abundant literature on the consequences of intimate partner violence (IPV) on mental health, psychological abuse has rarely been considered, and the separate effects of the different types of IPV have been understudied. The aim of this study was to analyze the association between physical, psychological, and sexual IPV and women's mental health. The sample included 1402 randomly selected women attending general practice in Spain. Information about IPV, use of psychoactive drugs, psychological distress (measured with the 12-item General Health Questionnaire), and self-perceived health status was obtained through a self-administered structured questionnaire. Lifetime IPV prevalence was 32%. All types of abuse were significantly associated with psychological distress, tranquilizers, and antidepressants use. Compared with never-abused women, those referring psychological abuse solely were more likely to present negative mental health indicators. Women reporting physical abuse presented worse self-perceived health than never-abused women (odds ratio [OR] = 1.74; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.04-2.91 for combined physical and psychological abuse; OR = 2.91; 95% CI = 1.73-4.91 for combined physical, psychological, and sexual abuse). Women referring the 3 types of abuse were the most likely to present impaired mental health. Increased intensity and duration of some abusive experiences also led to increased levels of association with poor mental health. This study underlines that different types of IPV can affect mental health differently. Results also show that IPV can be present even when there are no physical injuries and highlight the need for clinicians to screen for psychological, as well as physical and sexual, IPV.