| Literature DB >> 25329482 |
Jerlie Loko Roka1, Rafael Van den Bergh2, Sokhieng Au2, Eva De Plecker3, Rony Zachariah2, Marcel Manzi2, Vincent Lambert4, Elias Abi-Aad1, Kassi Nanan-N'Zeth1, Serge Nzuya1, Brigitte Omba1, Charly Shako1, Derick MuishaBaroki5, Jean Paul Basimuoneye5, Didier Amudiandroy Moke6, Emmanuel Lampaert1, Lucien Masangu1, Anja De Weggheleire1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Outcomes of sexual violence care programmes may vary according to the profile of survivors, type of violence suffered, and local context. Analysis of existing sexual violence care services could lead to their better adaptation to the local contexts. We therefore set out to compare the Médecins Sans Frontières sexual violence programmes in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) in a zone of conflict (Masisi, North Kivu) and post-conflict (Niangara, Haut-Uélé).Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25329482 PMCID: PMC4203825 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0111096
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1Age histogram of survivors of sexual violence attending the Médecins Sans Frontières sexual violence care programmes in Masisi (conflict zone) and Niangara (post-conflict zone), Democratic Republic of Congo, 2012.
Characteristics of presentation to sexual violence programmes in Masisi (conflict zone) and Niangara (post-conflict zone), Democratic Republic of Congo, 2012.
| Masisi | Niangara | ||||
| N | % | N | % | p-value | |
|
|
|
| |||
|
|
| ||||
| Self or relative/friend | 195 | 40% | 47 | 26% | |
| Community talks/community member** | 97 | 20% | 20 | 11% | |
| Theatre awareness campaign | 0 | 0 | 31 | 17% | |
| Other NGO | 75 | 15% | 54 | 30% | |
| Medical structure | 71 | 15% | 17 | 9% | |
| Police | 11 | 2% | 8 | 4% | |
| Other | 42 | 9% | 3 | 2% | |
|
|
| ||||
| <72 h | 295 | 60% | 58 | 32% | |
| 72 −120 h | 15 | 3% | 18 | 10% | |
| 6 days −1 month | 65 | 13% | 46 | 26% | |
| 1 month −1 year | 75 | 15% | 46 | 26% | |
| >1 year | 41 | 8% | 12 | 7% | |
|
|
|
|
| ||
| No access to health structures | 32 | 16% | 11 | 9% | |
| Lack of knowledge of treatments | 57 | 29% | 14 | 12% | |
| Fear | 29 | 15% | 27 | 22% | |
| Shame | 13 | 7% | 0 | 0 | |
| Other | 65 | 33% | 67 | 57% | |
| Not entered | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3% | |
*Chi-square test for proportions; **: including mamans conseillères in the Masisi programme; NGO: non-governmental organisation.
Figure 2Distribution of sexual violence cases attending the Médecins Sans Frontières sexual violence care programme in Masisi, Democratic Republic of Congo, 2012.
Characteristics of sexual violence among survivors presenting for care in Masisi (conflict zone) and Niangara (post-conflict zone), Democratic Republic of Congo, 2012.
| Masisi | Niangara | ||||
| N | % | N | % | p-value | |
|
|
| ||||
| Rape | 477 | 97% | 171 | 95% | |
| Sexual Touching | 5 | 1% | 3 | 2% | |
| Forced to rape | 6 | 1% | 1 | 1% | |
| Non-sexual aggression | 3 | 1% | 5 | 3% | |
|
|
| ||||
| 1 | 363 | 74% | 150 | 83% | |
| 2–4 | 110 | 22% | 30 | 17% | |
| 5 and more | 15 | 3% | 0 | 0 | |
| Unknown | 3 | 1% | 0 | 0 | |
|
|
| ||||
| Known civilian | 116 | 24% | 86 | 48% | |
| Unknown civilian | 71 | 15% | 42 | 23% | |
| Military | 251 | 51% | 19 | 11% | |
| Family member | 0 | 0 | 31 | 17% | |
| Other | 53 | 11% | 2 | 1% | |
|
|
| ||||
| Armed assault | 321 | 65% | 8 | 5% | |
|
|
| ||||
| Any associated violence | 176 | 36% | 34 | 19% | |
|
|
| ||||
| Any physical trauma | 51 | 10% | 69 | 38% | |
*Chi-square test for proportions, except where indicated; **Chi-square test with Yates’ correction; *** Including beatings, mutilations, robbery, destruction of property, rape in public and sexual exploitation.
Treatment characteristics of sexual violence survivors presenting for care in Masisi (conflict zone) and Niangara (post-conflict zone), Democratic Republic of Congo, 2012.
| Masisi | Niangara | ||||
| N | % | N | % | p-value | |
|
|
| ||||
| First return visit | 239/491 | 49% | 109/180 | 61% | |
| Second return visit | 137/491 | 28% | 68/178 | 38% | |
| Third return visit | 51/462 | 11% | 35/155 | 23% | |
| Fourth return visit | 15/354 | 4% | 13/109 | 12% | |
|
|
| ||||
| Turned down | 7 | 1% | 5 | 3% | |
| Test not available | 292 | 60% | 44 | 25% | |
| Status already known | 1 | 0.2% | 2 | 1% | |
| Postponed to a later date | 9 | 2% | 106 | 59% | |
| Consented to testing | 181 | 37% | 21 | 12% | |
| Not documented | 1 | 0.2% | 2 | 1% | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Positive | 4 | 2% | 1 | 3% | |
| Negative | 207 | 98% | 37 | 97% | |
|
| |||||
| Eligible (all survivors of rape presenting within 72 h) | 288 | 59% | 51 | 29% | <0.0001 |
| Started (out of eligible) | 284 | 99% | 51 | 100% | 0.4 |
| Completed (out of started) | 56 | 20% | 20 | 39% | 0.002 |
|
| |||||
| Eligible (all survivors of rape) | 483 | 98% | 172 | 96% | 0.03 |
| Started (out of eligible) | 480 | 99% | 164 | 95% | 0.0004 |
|
| |||||
| Eligible (all female survivors of rape age 12–45 presenting within 5 days) | 274 | 56% | 53 | 29% | <0.0001 |
| Started (out of eligible) | 250 | 91% | 46 | 87% | 0.3 |
|
| |||||
| Eligible (all female patients age 12–45) | 424 | 86% | 148 | 82% | 0.2 |
| Test done (out of eligible) | 408 | 96% | 130 | 88% | 0.0002 |
| Test positive (out of done) | 18 | 4% | 19 | 15% | 0.0001 |
| Abortion requested (out of pregnant) | 2/18 | 17% | 12 | 63% | 0.01 |
| Abortion done (out of requested) | 0 | 0 | 9 | 75% | 0.05 |
|
| |||||
| TT1 | 334 | 68% | 138 | 77% | 0.03 |
| TT2 (out of TT1) | 59 | 18% | 36 | 26% | 0.04 |
|
| |||||
| HepB1 | 266 | 54% | 142 | 79% | <0.0001 |
| HepB2 (out of HepB1) | 161 | 61% | 83 | 59% | 0.7 |
*Chi-square test for proportions; **Follow-up completion was assessed at 7 days (visit 1), 28 days (visit 2), 3 months (visit 3), and 6 months (visit 4); denominators are the number of patients who were eligible for these follow-up visits; ***Chi-square test with Yates’ correction.
PEP: Post-Exposure Prophylaxis; STI: Sexually Transmitted Infection.