Dataset Information

Effect of screening for partner violence on women's quality of life: a randomized controlled trial.

ABSTRACT: Although partner violence screening has been endorsed by many health organizations, there is insufficient evidence that it has beneficial health outcomes.To determine the effect of computerized screening for partner violence plus provision of a partner violence resource list vs provision of a partner violence list only on women's health in primary care settings, compared with a control group.A 3-group blinded randomized controlled trial at 10 primary health care centers in Cook County, Illinois. Participants were enrolled from May 2009-April 2010 and reinterviewed 1 year (range, 48-56 weeks) later. Participants were English- or Spanish-speaking women meeting specific inclusion criteria and seeking clinical services at study sites. Of 3537 women approached, 2727 were eligible, 2708 were randomized (99%), and 2364 (87%) were recontacted 1 year later. Mean age of participants was 39 years. Participants were predominantly non-Latina African American (55%) or Latina (37%), had a high school education or less (57%), and were uninsured (57%).Randomization into 3 intervention groups: (1) partner violence screen (using the Partner Violence Screen instrument) plus a list of local partner violence resources if screening was positive (n = 909); (2) partner violence resource list only without screen (n = 893); and (3) no-screen, no-partner violence list control group (n=898).Quality of life (QOL, physical and mental health components) was the primary outcome, measured on the 12-item Short Form (scale range 0-100, mean of 50 for US population).At 1-year follow-up, there were no significant differences in the QOL physical health component between the screen plus partner violence resource list group (n = 801; mean score, 46.8; 95% CI, 46.1-47.4), the partner violence resource list only group (n = 772; mean score, 46.4; 95% CI, 45.8-47.1), and the control group (n = 791; mean score, 47.2; 95% CI, 46.5-47.8), or in the mental health component (screen plus partner violence resource list group [mean score, 48.3; 95% CI, 47.5-49.1], the partner violence resource list only group [mean score, 48.0; 95% CI, 47.2-48.9], and the control group [mean score, 47.8; 95% CI, 47.0-48.6]). There were also no differences between groups in days unable to work or complete housework; number of hospitalizations, emergency department, or ambulatory care visits; proportion who contacted a partner violence agency; or recurrence of partner violence.Among women receiving care in primary care clinics, providing a partner violence resource list with or without screening did not result in improved health.clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00526994.

SUBMITTER: Klevens J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4689430 | biostudies-literature | 2012 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Effect of screening for partner violence on women's quality of life: a randomized controlled trial.

Klevens Joanne J Kee Romina R Trick William W Garcia Diana D Angulo Francisco R FR Jones Robin R Sadowski Laura S LS

JAMA 20120801 7

<h4>Context</h4>Although partner violence screening has been endorsed by many health organizations, there is insufficient evidence that it has beneficial health outcomes.<h4>Objective</h4>To determine the effect of computerized screening for partner violence plus provision of a partner violence resource list vs provision of a partner violence list only on women's health in primary care settings, compared with a control group.<h4>Design, setting, and participants</h4>A 3-group blinded randomized ...[more]

PMID: 22893165

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceIntimate partner violence (IPV) is a public health problem with significant adverse consequences for women and children. Past evaluations of a nurse home visitation program for pregnant women and first-time mothers experiencing social and economic disadvantage have not consistently shown reductions in IPV.ObjectiveTo determine the effect on maternal quality of life of a nurse home visitation program augmented by an IPV intervention, compared with the nurse home visitation program alone.Design, setting, and participantsCluster-based, single-blind, randomized clinical trial at 15 sites in 8 US states (May 2011-May 2015) enrolling 492 socially disadvantaged pregnant women (≥16 years) participating in a 2.5-year nurse home visitation program.InterventionsIn augmented program sites (n = 229 participants across 7 sites), nurses received intensive IPV education and delivered an IPV intervention that included a clinical pathway to guide assessment and tailor care focused on safety planning, violence awareness, self-efficacy, and referral to social supports. The standard program (n = 263 participants across 8 sites) included limited questions about violence exposure and information for abused women but no standardized IPV training for nurses.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary outcome was quality of life (WHOQOL-BREF; range, 0-400; higher score indicates better quality of life) obtained through interviews at baseline and every 6 months until 24 months after delivery. From 17 prespecified secondary outcomes, 7 secondary end points are reported, including scores on the Composite Abuse Scale, SPAN (Startle, Physiological Arousal, Anger, and Numbness), Prime-MD Patient Health Questionnaire, TWEAK (Tolerance/Worry About Drinking/Eye-Opener/Amnesia/C[K]ut Down on Drinking), Drug Abuse Severity Test, and the 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey (physical and mental health), version 2.ResultsAmong 492 participants enrolled (mean age, 20.4 years), 421 (86%) completed the trial. Quality of life improved from baseline to 24 months in both groups (change in WHOQOL-BREF scores from 299.5 [SD, 54.4] to 308.2 [SD, 52.6] in the augmented program group vs from 293.6 [SD, 56.4] to 316.4 [SD, 57.5] in the standard program group). Based on multilevel growth curve analysis, there was no statistically significant difference between groups (modeled score difference, -4.9 [95% CI, -16.5 to 6.7]). There were no statistically significant differences between study groups in any of the secondary participant end points. There were no adverse events recorded in either group.Conclusions and relevanceAmong pregnant women experiencing social and economic disadvantage and preparing to parent for the first time, augmentation of a nurse home visitation program with a comprehensive IPV intervention, compared with the home visitation program alone, did not significantly improve quality of life at 24 months after delivery. These findings do not support the use of this intervention.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01372098.

Project description:Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a significant public health issue, with a 25% lifetime prevalence. Screening for IPV in primary care is a recommended practice whose effectiveness is debated. To assess the effect of an electronic health record (EHR)-based multifactorial intervention screening on the detection of IPV risk in primary care practice. This cluster randomized clinical trial used a stepped-wedge design to assign 15 family medicine primary care clinics in the Medical University of South Carolina Health System in the Charleston region to 3 matched blocks from October 6, 2020, to March 31, 2023. All women aged 18 to 49 years who were seen in these clinics participated in this study. A noninterruptive EHR alert combined with confidential screening by computer questionnaire using the EHR platform followed by risk assessment and a decision support template. The main outcomes were the rate at which patients were screened for IPV across the clinics and the rate at which patients at risk for IPV were detected by screening procedures. The study clinics cared for 8895 unique patients (mean [SD] age, 34.6 [8.7] years; 1270 [14.3%] with Medicaid or Medicare and 7625 [85.7%] with private, military, or other insurance) over the study period eligible for the screening intervention. The intervention had significant effects on the overall rate of screening for IPV, increasing the rate of screening from 45.2% (10 268 of 22 730 patient visits) to 65.3% (22 303 of 34 157 patient visits) when the noninterruptive alert was active (relative risk, 1.46 [95% CI, 1.44-1.49]; P < .001). The confidential screening process was more effective than baseline nurse-led oral screening at identifying patients reporting past-year IPV (130 of 8895 patients [1.5%] vs 9 of 17 433 patients [0.1%]). The intervention was largely effective in increasing screening adherence and the positive detection rate of IPV in primary care. A highly private approach to screening for IPV in primary care may be necessary to achieve adequate detection rates while addressing potential safety issues of patients experiencing IPV. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT06284148.

Project description:Abstract:Potential protection from violence has been suggested as an explanation for women's preferences for more masculine partners. Previous studies, however, have not considered that violence may be multi-modal, and hence come from different sources. Therefore, we tested the effect of different fears of violence (i.e. vulnerability to public crime, likelihood of within-partnership violence) on masculinity preferences of women from Colombia, a country known for its high rates of violence. Eighty-three adult heterosexual women (mean age?±?SD?=?26.7?±?6.01) answered a survey that included questions about health (e.g. frequency of illnesses during the last year and during childhood), access to media (e.g. time spent watching television, frequency of internet use), education (i.e. highest level achieved) and violence perceptions. Participants' masculinity preferences for Salvadoran, European and Colombian male faces were recorded. Factor analysis revealed two different factors for the answers to questions related to violence. One factor loaded mostly on questions related to public violence and the second factor related to domestic violence. We found that women with higher scores on the domestic violence factor preferred significantly less masculine Colombian male faces. Even after controlling for participant age, education, access to media (TV and internet) and health-related factors, the domestic violence factor contributed significantly to explaining masculinity preferences. The results presented here suggest that women's preferences for masculinity may be a strategy to avoid aggressive partners and that the source of violence matters in mate choice. Significance statement:Women who perceive higher risks of domestic violence prefer less masculine looking partners. Using an experimental approach, we show that Colombian women who feel more in danger of violence within partnership prefer the faces of less masculine males. This was true even after controlling for women's education level, health and access to media.

Project description:ObjectivesThis was a 2-year follow-up study of a primary care-based counselling intervention (weave) for women experiencing intimate partner violence (IPV). We aimed to assess whether differences in depression found at 12 months (lower depression for intervention than control participants) would be sustained at 24 months and differences in quality in life, general mental and physical health and IPV would emerge.DesignCluster randomised controlled trial. Researchers blinded to allocation. Unit of randomisation: family doctors.SettingFifty-two primary care clinics, Victoria, Australia.ParticipantsBaseline: 272 English-speaking, female patients (intervention n=137, doctors=35; control n=135, doctors=37), who screened positive for fear of partner in past 12 months. Twenty-four-month response rates: intervention 59% (81/137), control 63% (85/135).InterventionsIntervention doctors received training to deliver brief, woman-centred counselling. Intervention patients were invited to receive this counselling (uptake rate: 49%). Control doctors received standard IPV information; delivered usual care.Primary and secondary outcome measuresTwenty-four months primary outcomes: WHO Quality of Life-Bref dimensions, Short-Form Health Survey (SF-12) mental health.Secondary outcomesSF-12 physical health and caseness for depression and anxiety (Hospital Anxiety Depression Scale), post-traumatic stress disorder (Check List-Civilian), IPV (Composite Abuse Scale), physical symptoms (≥6 in last month). Data collected through postal survey. Mixed-effects regressions adjusted for location (rural/urban) and clustering.ResultsNo differences detected between groups on quality of life (physical: 1.5, 95% CI -2.9 to 5.9; psychological: -0.2, 95% CI -4.8 to 4.4,; social: -1.4, 95% CI -8.2 to 5.4; environmental: -0.8, 95% CI -4.0 to 2.5), mental health status (-1.6, 95% CI -5.3 to 2.1) or secondary outcomes. Both groups improved on primary outcomes, IPV, anxiety.ConclusionsIntervention was no more effective than usual care in improving 2-year quality of life, mental and physical health and IPV, despite differences in depression at 12 months. Future refinement and testing of type, duration and intensity of primary care IPV interventions is needed.Trial registration numberACTRN12608000032358.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Intensive dietary intervention programs may lead to benefits in vitality and other components of health quality. The Women's Health Initiative Dietary Modification (DM) intervention includes a large randomized controlled trial of an intensive intervention. OBJECTIVE:To evaluate whether the intervention is associated with improved health-related quality of life (HRQoL) subscales, overall self-reported health, depression symptoms, cognitive functioning, and sleep quality. DESIGN:This randomized controlled trial was analyzed as intent to treat. PARTICIPANTS:Between 1993 and 1998, 48,835 women aged 50 to 79 years were recruited by 40 clinical centers across the United States. Eligibility included having fat intake at baseline ?32% of total calories, and excluded women with any prior colorectal or breast cancer, recent other cancers, type 1 diabetes, or medical conditions with predicted survival <3 years. INTERVENTION:Goals were to reduce calories from fat to 20%, increase vegetables and fruit to 5+ servings, and increase grain servings to 6+ servings a day. During the first year, 18 group sessions were held, with quarterly sessions thereafter. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:The RAND 36-Item Health Survey was used to assess HRQoL at baseline, Year 1, and close-out (about 8 years postrandomization), and estimate differential HRQoL subscale change scores. STATISTICAL ANALYSES PERFORMED:Mean change in HRQoL scores (Year 1 minus baseline) were compared by randomization group using linear models. RESULTS:At 1 year, there was a differential change between intervention and comparison group of 1.7 units (95% CI 1.5, 2.0) in general health associated with the intervention. DM intervention improved physical functioning by 2.0 units (95% CI 1.7, 2.3), vitality by 1.9 units (95% CI 1.6, 2.2), and global quality of life by 0.09 units (95% CI 0.07, 0.12). With the exception of global quality of life, these effects were significantly modified by body mass index at baseline. CONCLUSIONS:DM intervention was associated with small, but significant improvements in three HRQoL subscales: general health, physical functioning, and vitality at 1 year follow-up, with the largest improvements seen in the women with the greatest baseline body mass index.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a human rights violation and leading health burden for women. Safety planning is a hallmark of specialist family violence intervention, yet only a small proportion of women access formal services. A Web-based safety decision aid may reach a wide audience of women experiencing IPV and offer the opportunity to prioritize and plan for safety for themselves and their families. OBJECTIVE:The aim of this study was to test the efficacy of a Web-based safety decision aid (isafe) for women experiencing IPV. METHODS:We conducted a fully automated Web-based two-arm parallel randomized controlled trial (RCT) in a general population of New Zealand women who had experienced IPV in the past 6 months. Computer-generated randomization was based on a minimization scheme with stratification by severity of violence and children. Women were randomly assigned to the password-protected intervention website (safety priority setting, danger assessment, and tailored action plan components) or control website (standard, nonindividualized information). Primary endpoints were self-reported mental health (Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale-Revised, CESD-R) and IPV exposure (Severity of Violence Against Women Scale, SVAWS) at 12-month follow-up. Analyses were by intention to treat. RESULTS:Women were recruited from September 2012 to September 2014. Participants were aged between 16 and 60 years, 27% (111/412) self-identified as Māori (indigenous New Zealand), and 51% (210/412) reported at baseline that they were unsure of their future plans for their partner relationship. Among the 412 women recruited, retention at 12 months was 87%. The adjusted estimated intervention effect for SVAWS was -12.44 (95% CI -23.35 to -1.54) for Māori and 0.76 (95% CI -5.57 to 7.09) for non-Māori. The adjusted intervention effect for CESD-R was -7.75 (95% CI -15.57 to 0.07) for Māori and 1.36 (-3.16 to 5.88) for non-Māori. No study-related adverse events were reported. CONCLUSIONS:The interactive, individualized Web-based isafe decision aid was effective in reducing IPV exposure limited to indigenous Māori women. Discovery of a treatment effect in a population group that experiences significant health disparities is a welcome, important finding. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR): ACTRN12612000708853; https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?ACTRN=12612000708853 (Archived by Webcite at http://www.webcitation/61MGuVXdK).

Dataset Information

Effect of screening for partner violence on women's quality of life: a randomized controlled trial.

Publications

Effect of screening for partner violence on women's quality of life: a randomized controlled trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets