Advertisement

Screening for partner violence in the early postpartum period: are we missing families most at risk of experiencing violence?

  • Tamara L. TaillieuEmail author
  • Douglas A. Brownridge
  • Marni Brownell
Quantitative Research

Abstract

Objectives

In Manitoba, government policy is for public health nurses to screen families with newborns within 1-week post-discharge for risk factors associated with poor child developmental health. The purpose of this study was to compare the characteristics of families who are screened for intimate partner violence (IPV) with families without a documented response to an IPV screen item. This information can be used to help identify and target families in need of support whose needs are not being met within the current system.

Methods

Manitoban women giving birth to a live singleton in the province from January 1, 2003 to December 31, 2006 were included in the analyses (N = 52,710). Data were part of a larger research study following these families for several years to examine longer-term developmental outcomes. Administrative databases from the Manitoba Centre for Health Policy provided data for the study. Descriptive statistics and logistic regression were used to examine relationships between IPV screen status and socio-demographic covariates and birth outcomes.

Results

In the study population, 66.7% of the sample were screened for IPV. Women less than 20 years of age, not in married or common-law unions, and living in lower income areas were less likely to have a documented response to the IPV screen item. A low number of prenatal care visits, prenatal mental health problems, and prenatal substance use, as well as premature and low birthweight delivery, were associated with a decreased likelihood of having a documented response to the IPV screen item.

Conclusion

Incorporating violence screening into routine prenatal and postnatal care, rather than only screening women after birth, may help to better identify families with unmet needs and ensure more timely referrals to positive strengths-based supports and services.

Keywords

Intimate partner violence Screening for violence Pregnancy Prenatal morbidities Birth outcomes 

Résumé

Objectifs

Au Manitoba, les politiques gouvernementales exigent aux infirmières en santé publique d’effectuer un dépistage auprès des familles avec des nouveau-nés dans la semaine qui suit le congé de l’hôpital. Ceci est un dépistage pour des facteurs de risques associés aux mauvais résultats en matière de santé lors du développement pendant l’enfance. Cette étude visait à comparer les caractéristiques familiales des familles dépistées pour la violence entre partenaires intimes (VPI) aux familles sans réponse documentée à la question de VPI lors du dépistage. Ces informations peuvent être utilisées pour identifier et cibler les familles ayant besoin de soutien et dont les besoins ne sont pas satisfaits dans le système actuel.

Méthodes

La population étudiée était les femmes manitobaines ayant donné naissance à un nouveau-né vivant lors d’un accouchement simple dans la province du 1er janvier 2003 au 31 décembre 2006 (N=52 710). Les données étaient recueillies dans le contexte d’une étude plus vaste pendant plusieurs années auprès de ces familles pour étudier les résultats de développement à plus long terme. Les données étaient tirées des bases de données administratives du Centre des politiques de santé du Manitoba (Manitoba Centre for Health Policy). Les analyses descriptives et la régression logistique ont été adoptées pour analyser les liens entre le dépistage VPI et les variables sociodémographiques et les issues de grossesses.

Résultats

Dans cette population, 66,7 % de l’échantillon a subi un dépistage de VPI. Les femmes de moins de 20 ans, non mariées ou en union de fait, et habitant dans un quartier à faible revenue avaient une probabilité réduite d’avoir une réponse documentée à la question de VPI lors du dépistage. Un faible nombre de visites prénatales, des problèmes de santé prénatales, la consommation de substance prénatale, une naissance prématurée et un faible poids à la naissance étaient liés à une probabilité réduite d’avoir une réponse documentée à la question de VPI lors du dépistage.

Conclusion

Intégrer le dépistage de violence lors des soins de bases prénatales et après la naissance, plutôt que seulement dépister les femmes après la naissance, pourrait aider à mieux identifier les familles dont les besoins ne sont pas satisfaits et assurer des recommandations plus rapides aux services et soutien axés sur les forces.

Mots-clés

Violence entre partenaires intimes Dépistage de violence Grossesse Morbidités prénatales Issues de la naissance 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge the Manitoba Centre for Health Policy for the use of data contained in the Manitoba Population Research Data Repository under project no. H2015:355[HS18922] (HIPC no. 2015/2016-31). Data used in this study are from the Manitoba Population Research Data Repository housed at the Manitoba Centre for Health Policy, University of Manitoba, and were derived from data provided by Manitoba Health and Healthy Child Manitoba. The results and conclusions are those of the authors and no official endorsement by the Manitoba Centre for Health Policy, Manitoba Health, or other data providers is intended or should be inferred.

The authors would also like to acknowledge Dr. Michelle Porter for her valuable comments and suggestions regarding the development and design of this research project, as well as for providing valuable feedback on the manuscript draft.

Funding information

This research was supported by a University of Manitoba Graduate Fellowship, Manitoba Graduate Scholarship (Doctoral), Graduate Student Thesis Research Award in the Area of Child Development, and the Evelyn Shapiro Award for Health Services Research awarded to T. Taillieu.

Compliance with ethical standards

This study was approved by the Manitoba Health Information Privacy Committee (HIPC No. 2015/2016-31) and the University of Manitoba Health Research Ethics Board (Ethics File No. H2015:355 (HS18922)).

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Alhusen, J., Ray, E., Sharps, P., & Bullock, L. (2015). Intimate partner violence during pregnancy: maternal and neonatal outcomes. Journal of Women's Health, 24(1), 100–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. American Academy of Pediatrics, Committee on Child Abuse and Neglect. (1998). The role of the pediatrician in recognizing and intervening on behalf of abused women. Pediatrics., 101(6), 1091–1092.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. (2012). Intimate partner violence [committee opinion no. 518]. Obstetrics and Gynecology, 119(2 Part 1), 412–417.Google Scholar
  4. Brownell, M. D., Chartier, M., Santos, R., Au, W., Roos, N. P., & Girard, D. (2011). Evaluation of a newborn screen for predicting out-of-home placement. Child Maltreatment, 16(4), 239–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Buck, L., & Collins, S. (2007). Why don’t midwives ask about domestic abuse? British Journal of Midwifery, 15(2), 753–758.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bunn, M. Y., Higa, N. A., Parker, W. J., & Kaneshiro, B. (2009). Domestic violence screening in pregnancy. Hawaii Medical Journal, 68(10), 240–242.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Capaldi, D. M., Knoble, N. B., Shortt, J. W., & Kim, H. K. (2012). A systematic review of risk factors for intimate partner violence. Partner Abuse, 3(2), 231–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chamberlain, L., & Perham-Hester, K. A. (2000). Physicians screening practices for female partner abuse during prenatal visits. Maternal and Child Health Journal, 4(2), 141–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. D’Avolio, D., Hawkins, J. W., Haggerty, L. A., et al. (2001). Screening for abuse: barriers and opportunities. Health Care for Women International, 22(4), 349–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Durant, T., Colley Gilbert, B., Saltzman, L. E., & Johnson, C. H. (2000). Opportunities for intervention: discussing physical abuse during prenatal care visits. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 19(4), 238–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Feldman, R. S., & Landry, O. (2015). Discovering the lifespan. 2 ndCanadian ed. Pearson Education: Saddle River.Google Scholar
  12. García-Moreno, C. (2002). Dilemmas and opportunities for an appropriate health-service response to violence against women. Lancet., 359(9316), 1509–1514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Healthy Child Manitoba. (2010). Families First program evaluation. Winnipeg: Healthy Child Manitoba.Google Scholar
  14. Heaman, M., Kingston, D., Helewa, M., et al. (2012). Perinatal services and outcomes in Manitoba. Winnipeg: Manitoba Centre for Health Policy.Google Scholar
  15. Howard, L. M., Oram, S., Galley, H., Trevillion, K., & Feder, G. (2013). Domestic violence and perinatal mental disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS Medicine, 10(5), e1001452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Howell, K. H., Miller-Graff, L. E., Hasselle, A. J., & Scrafford, K. E. (2017). The unique needs of pregnant violence-exposed women: a systematic review of current interventions and directions for translational research. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 34, 128–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kramer, M. S., Platt, R. W., Wen, S. W., et al. (2001). A new and improved population-based Canadian reference for birth weight for gestational age. Pediatrics., 108(2), e35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lauti, M., & Miller, D. (2008). Midwives’ and obstetricians’ perception of their role in the identification and management of family violence. New Zealand College of Midwives, 38, 12–16.Google Scholar
  19. Meuleners, L. B., Lee, A. H., Janssen, P. A., & Fraser, M. L. (2011). Maternal and foetal outcomes among pregnant women hospitalised due to interpersonal violence: a population based study in Western Australia, 2002-2008. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 11(70), 1–7.Google Scholar
  20. Mezey, G., Bacchus, L., Haworth, A., & Bewley, S. (2003). Midwives’ perceptions and experiences of routine enquiry for domestic violence. BJOG An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 110, 744–752.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. National Health Services Executive. (2001). Domestic violence: a resource manual for health care professionals. Cardiff: National Assembly for Wales.Google Scholar
  22. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. (2004). Confidential enquiry into maternal and child health: why mothers die 2000-2002. London: The Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists.Google Scholar
  23. Shah, P. S., & Shah, J. (2010). Maternal exposure to domestic violence and pregnancy and birth outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analyses. Journal of Women's Health (2002), 19(11), 2017–2031.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Sharps, P. W., Laughon, K., & Giangrande, S. K. (2007). Intimate partner violence and the childbearing year: maternal and infant health consequences. Trauma, Violence & Abuse, 8(2), 105–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Silverman, J. G., Decker, M. R., Reed, E., & Raj, A. (2006). Intimate partner violence victimization prior to and during pregnancy among women residing in 26 U.S. states: associations with maternal and neonatal health. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 195(1), 140–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada. (2005). Intimate partner violence consensus statement. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Canada, 27(4), 365–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Taillieu, T. L., & Brownridge, D. A. (2010). Violence against pregnant women: prevalence, patterns, risk factors, theories, and directions for future research. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 15(1), 14–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Thackery, J. P., Hibbard, R., Dowd, D., & the Committee on Child Abuse and Neglect, the Committee on Injury, Violence, and Poison Prevention. (2010). Intimate partner violence: the role of the pediatrician. Pediatrics., 125(5), 1094–1100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. United States Preventive Services Task Force. (2013). Screening for intimate partner violence and abuse of elderly and vulnerable adults: USPSTF recommendation statement. Annals of Internal Medicine, 158(6), 478–486.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Wathen, C. N., & MacMillan, H. L. (2003). Prevention of violence against women: recommendation statement from the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care. CMAJ., 169(6), 582–584.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  31. World Health Organization. (2010). Preventing intimate partner and sexual violence against women: taking action and generating evidence. Geneva: World Health Organization.Google Scholar
  32. Zhang, T., Hoddenbagh, J., McDonald, S., & Scrim, K. (2013). An estimation of the economic cost of spousal violence in Canada, 2009. Department of Justice: Ottawa.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Canadian Public Health Association 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Community Health SciencesUniversity of ManitobaWinnipegCanada
  2. 2.Manitoba Centre for Health Policy, Department of Community Health SciencesUniversity of ManitobaWinnipegCanada

Personalised recommendations