AIM: To identify the prevalence of intimate partner violence (IPV) against Japanese women (JW) and non-Japanese women (NJW) in a perinatal setting. Additional purposes were to identify the associated factors of IPV, describe the characteristics of IPV against NJW, and assess the acceptability of the Violence Against Women Screen (VAWS) instrument as a screening tool. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted from September to November 2007 in an urban hospital maternity clinic in Tokyo, Japan. Women who attended the maternity clinic received the VAWS instrument, which was translated into four languages (Japanese with Kanji and Hiragana, English, Chinese, and Tagalog) and was used to identify IPV. RESULTS: A total of 400 women participated in the study: 357 were JW and 43 were NJW. The prevalence rate of IPV among the JW was 31.4% and 21.4% among the NJW. There was no statistical significance between the two groups. A multiple logistic regression with adjusted odds ratio identified two associated factors for IPV: being multipara and previous experience of physical violence from a partner. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of IPV was not statistically different among JW and NJW. Screening for IPV, early intervention, and support should be expanded in hospitals and maternity clinics in Japan.
AIM: To identify the prevalence of intimate partner violence (IPV) against Japanese women (JW) and non-Japanese women (NJW) in a perinatal setting. Additional purposes were to identify the associated factors of IPV, describe the characteristics of IPV against NJW, and assess the acceptability of the Violence Against Women Screen (VAWS) instrument as a screening tool. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted from September to November 2007 in an urban hospital maternity clinic in Tokyo, Japan. Women who attended the maternity clinic received the VAWS instrument, which was translated into four languages (Japanese with Kanji and Hiragana, English, Chinese, and Tagalog) and was used to identify IPV. RESULTS: A total of 400 women participated in the study: 357 were JW and 43 were NJW. The prevalence rate of IPV among the JW was 31.4% and 21.4% among the NJW. There was no statistical significance between the two groups. A multiple logistic regression with adjusted odds ratio identified two associated factors for IPV: being multipara and previous experience of physical violence from a partner. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of IPV was not statistically different among JW and NJW. Screening for IPV, early intervention, and support should be expanded in hospitals and maternity clinics in Japan.