Literature DB >> 16862035

Community preferences for health states associated with intimate partner violence.

Eve Wittenberg1, Erika L Lichter, Michael L Ganz, Laura A McCloskey.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: One in 4 women is affected by intimate partner violence in her lifetime. This article reports on a cross-sectional survey to estimate community preferences for health states resulting from intimate partner violence.
METHODS: A secondary analysis was conducted of data from a convenience sample of 93 abused and 138 nonabused women (231 total) recruited for in-person interviews from hospital outpatient department waiting rooms in metropolitan Boston, Massachusetts. SF-12 data were converted to utilities to describe community-perspective preferences for health states associated with intimate partner violence. Linear regression analysis was used to explore the association between violence and utility while controlling for other health and demographic factors.
RESULTS: Median utility for intimate partner violence was between 0.58 and 0.63 on a scale of 0 (equivalent to death) to 1.0 (equivalent to optimal health), with a range from 0.64 to 0.66 for less severe violence to 0.53 to 0.62 for more severe violence. The data do not reveal whether violence itself is responsible for lower utility or whether a constellation of factors contributes to disutility experienced by women victims of abuse. DISCUSSION: The utility of health states experienced by women exposed to intimate partner violence is substantially diminished compared with optimal health and even other health conditions. These values quantify the substantial negative health impact of the experience of intimate partner violence in terms that allow comparison across diseases. They can be used in cost-effectiveness analyses to identify the benefits and potential returns from resources allocated to violence prevention and intervention efforts.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16862035     DOI: 10.1097/01.mlr.0000215860.58954.86

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Care        ISSN: 0025-7079            Impact factor:   2.983


  5 in total

1.  The anatomy of a community health center system-level intervention for intimate partner violence.

Authors:  Karin V Rhodes; Jeane Ann Grisso; Melissa Rodgers; Mira Gohel; Marcy Witherspoon; Martha Davis; Sandra Dempsey; Paul Crits-Christoph
Journal:  J Urban Health       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 3.671

2.  Cost-effectiveness of Identification and Referral to Improve Safety (IRIS), a domestic violence training and support programme for primary care: a modelling study based on a randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Angela Devine; Anne Spencer; Sandra Eldridge; Richard Norman; Gene Feder
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2012-06-22       Impact factor: 2.692

3.  Cost-effectiveness of a domestic violence and abuse training and support programme in primary care in the real world: updated modelling based on an MRC phase IV observational pragmatic implementation study.

Authors:  Estela Capelas Barbosa; Talitha Irene Verhoef; Steve Morris; Francesca Solmi; Medina Johnson; Alex Sohal; Farah El-Shogri; Susanna Dowrick; Clare Ronalds; Chris Griffiths; Sandra Eldridge; Natalia V Lewis; Angela Devine; Anne Spencer; Gene Feder
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2018-08-29       Impact factor: 2.692

4.  Women's evaluation of abuse and violence care in general practice: a cluster randomised controlled trial (weave).

Authors:  Kelsey L Hegarty; Jane M Gunn; Lorna J O'Doherty; Angela Taft; Patty Chondros; Gene Feder; Jill Astbury; Stephanie Brown
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2010-01-02       Impact factor: 3.295

5.  Measuring the effect of intimate partner violence on health-related quality of life: a qualitative focus group study.

Authors:  Eve Wittenberg; Manisha Joshi; Kristie A Thomas; Laura A McCloskey
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2007-12-19       Impact factor: 3.186

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.