| Literature DB >> 23116189 |
Suneeta Krishnan1, Kalyani Subbiah, Prabha Chandra, Krishnamachari Srinivasan.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Domestic violence - physical, psychological, or sexual abuse perpetrated against women by one or more family members - is highly prevalent in India. However, relatively little research has been conducted on interventions with the potential to mitigate domestic violence and its adverse health consequences, and few resources exist to guide safety planning and monitoring in the context of intervention research. Dil Mil is a promising women's empowerment-based intervention developed in India that engages with young women (daughters-in-law) and their mothers-in-law to mitigate domestic violence and related adverse health outcomes. This paper describes the design of a randomized controlled trial of Dil Mil in Bengaluru, India, with a focus on strategies used to minimize study-related risks and monitor safety. METHODS/Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2012 PMID: 23116189 PMCID: PMC3534227 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2458-12-943
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Public Health ISSN: 1471-2458 Impact factor: 3.295
Figure 1Causal Model.
Figure 2Overview of Study Procedures.
Overview of ethical challenges and design responses
| Definition of study population | Pregnant women and women with a history of domestic conflict and violence are vulnerable groups | Antenatal care offers a potentially safe opportunity to intervene on violence; Interventions to mitigate family conflict and violence may have beneficial impact on pregnancy outcomes |
| Study advertisement | Disruption of family relationships because of family members’ perception of the intervention as being focused on DV or because of resistance to the types of social and behavioral change encouraged by the intervention, and risk of backlash from family and community | Study framed as testing a family health intervention to promote the health of younger and older women and children; Community advisory group comprising community elders and leaders (male and female) formed and community meetings held to enlist support for the study and introduce research team |
| Participant recruitment | Limited decision-making autonomy among young women; Loss of confidentiality due to screening for domestic conflict and violence; Loss of confidentiality during participant follow-up | Multistep recruitment process used beginning with DILs; Completion of eligibility screening in private room at health center; Ascertainment of acceptable modes of contacting participants for follow-up; Use of standardized scripts to respond to questions from family/community members and avoidance of discussions about study specifics with non-participants; Avoidance of conversations that may jeopardize confidentiality in public settings |
| Participant retention and follow-up | Loss of confidentiality | Use of participant tracking system with modes of contact approved by participant; Staff trained not to discuss sensitive study information with participant or others in public settings; Use of standardized scripts for participant follow-up |
| Safety Monitoring | Defining safety in a context of high prevalence of DV and in a population with prior history of family conflict and violence; Monitoring safety | Classification of safety-related events as “safety alerts” or “adverse events,” with alerts comprising incidents that are highly unlikely to be related to study participation and/or not considered to be severe and adverse events comprising incidents that are unexpected, temporally associated with and likely to be related to study participation and severe; Establishment of rapport with participants and creating a safe environment at the health center by offering information on DV-related resources at every visit, establishing an information desk at study health centers, and providing staff contact information; Presence of on-site counselor |
| Randomization | Confusion regarding or lack of understanding of randomization | Explanation of randomization in terms of a lottery; Opening of envelope with treatment assignment in front of dyad |
| Intervention implementation | Stress, discomfort or distress as a result of intervention participation; Loss of confidentiality in group education sessions | Establishing ground rules for group session participation including respect for each other’s views; Inclusion of activities to promote peer support and dialogue, such as co-counseling; Staff trained to handle difficult situations arising during group sessions; Counseling available on site and referral information offered; Child care and food offered; Participants and staff take a pledge of confidentiality regarding personal information shared in the group |
| Data collection | Stress, discomfort or distress caused by interview questions; Loss of confidentiality | Interviewers trained to conduct interviews with sensitivity and empathy; Use of statements such as, “some women can feel sad or upset by these questions—do remember that you can decide not to answer any question” repeated at strategic points of interview; Counseling available on site and referral information offered; All interviews conducted in closed room at health center; Data identified only through unique numeric identifiers |
Eligibility criteria
| · Married | · MIL of a DIL who consents to participate |
| · 18–30 years | · Kannada or Tamil speaking |
| · Have ever experienced physical, psychological, or sexual violence perpetrated by husbands, MILs, or other family members | · Able and willing to provide consent |
| · Pregnant & in 1st or 2nd trimestera | |
| · Kannada or Tamil speaking | |
| · Able and willing to provide consent | |
| · Able and willing to refer MIL for study recruitment | |
| · DIL of a MIL who consents to participate | |
| · Cognitive impairment | · Cognitive impairment |
| · Planning to move or moving from the area prior to 6 months postpartum | · Planning to move or moving from the area before the DIL’s completion of 6 months postpartum |
*Confirmed by urine pregnancy test and questions to assess stage of pregnancy (using the last menstrual period).
Measures
| | | |
| Recruitment, adherence, retention (proportion of eligible individuals who enroll, sociodemographic comparison of enrollees and non-enrollees, adherence to intervention and data collection visits, attrition) | X | X |
| Safety (e.g., number and nature of safety-related events) | X | X |
| Contamination (knowledge of neighbors, friends, or relatives participating in the intervention arm) | Xa | Xa |
| | | |
| Demographic indicators of access to resources (e.g., age, marital duration, parity, education, employment, socioeconomic status, household structure and husband’s age, education and income [ | X | X |
| Knowledge and perceptions of DV & family Health (e.g., knowledge and perceptions of reproductive and infant health [ | X | X |
| Gender-equitable attitudes (modified version of the Gender Equitable Male [GEM] scale [ | X | X |
| Decision-making (involvement in household decisions [ | X | X |
| Freedom of movement (indicators of mobility [ | X | X |
| | | |
| Social support (DILs’ perceptions of social support and MILs’ provision of emotional and practical support using an adapted Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support [ | X | X |
| Communication (indicators of communication between MILs and DILs and with sons/husbands regarding household matters) | X | X |
| Resistance to violence (DILs’ overt and covert resistance to DV and MILs’ opposition to DV by their son) | X | X |
| | | |
| Domestic violence (measures of physical, sexual, and psychological acts of violence perpetrated by husbands, MILs, or other family members using an adapted Conflict Tactics Scale [ | X | X |
| Perceived quality of life (WHOQOL-BREF [ | X | X |
| Anxiety and depression (Kessler Psychological Distress Scale – K10) | X | X |
| Postnatal Depression (Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale [ | X | |
| Maternal and Infant Health (maternal height, weight, weight gain during pregnancy, and BMI; infant weight, length, and head circumference) | X |
aAssessed only among control arm MILs and DILs.