Dawn M Johnson1, Nicole L Johnson2, Curt G Beckwith3, Patrick A Palmieri4, Caron Zlotnick5. 1. Department of Psychology, University of Akron, Akron, Ohio. Electronic address: johnsod@uakron.edu. 2. Department of Psychology, University of Akron, Akron, Ohio. 3. Department of Medicine, Division of Infectious Diseases, The Miriam Hospital, Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island. 4. Summa Health System, Department of Psychiatry, Center for the Treatment and Study of Traumatic Stress, Akron, Ohio. 5. Department of Psychiatry, Butler Hospital and Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island; Department of Psychiatry and Mental Health, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection and intimate partner violence (IPV) are interconnected public health problems. However, few HIV prevention interventions address the unique needs of IPV survivors in shelter and none of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's best-evidence risk reduction interventions adequately explore the complex relationship between IPV and HIV risk. Although battered women's shelters provide a safe and supportive environment for women in crisis, most do not offer HIV risk reduction services or sexual safety planning. METHODS: This study evaluated the feasibility, acceptability, and initial efficacy of rapid HIV testing and brief risk prevention intervention developed for residents of battered women's shelters. The Safe Alternatives For Empowered sex for intimate partner violence intervention (SAFE-IPV) was evaluated in an open trial (N = 98). Participants were assessed with a series of standardized interviews and self-reports at screening and 3 months after leaving the shelter. RESULTS: Few eligible participants declined SAFE-IPV and participants who received SAFE-IPV reported high levels of satisfaction. No participants in the open trial tested positive for HIV. However, participants reported significantly fewer unprotected vaginal and anal sexual occasions and increased intentions to engage in risk preventative behaviors 3 months after leaving shelter compared with the 3 months before shelter. Additionally, participants reported significant improvements on HIV risk factors addressed in SAFE-IPV at the 3-month follow-up (i.e., reduced emotional, physical, and sexual harm by abuser, posttraumatic stress symptoms, hazardous alcohol use, and drug use). DISCUSSION: These results extend prior research on HIV prevention with women with IPV, demonstrating the acceptability, feasibility, and initial efficacy of SAFE-IPV within battered women's shelter settings.
BACKGROUND: Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection and intimate partner violence (IPV) are interconnected public health problems. However, few HIV prevention interventions address the unique needs of IPV survivors in shelter and none of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's best-evidence risk reduction interventions adequately explore the complex relationship between IPV and HIV risk. Although battered women's shelters provide a safe and supportive environment for women in crisis, most do not offer HIV risk reduction services or sexual safety planning. METHODS: This study evaluated the feasibility, acceptability, and initial efficacy of rapid HIV testing and brief risk prevention intervention developed for residents of battered women's shelters. The Safe Alternatives For Empowered sex for intimate partner violence intervention (SAFE-IPV) was evaluated in an open trial (N = 98). Participants were assessed with a series of standardized interviews and self-reports at screening and 3 months after leaving the shelter. RESULTS: Few eligible participants declined SAFE-IPV and participants who received SAFE-IPV reported high levels of satisfaction. No participants in the open trial tested positive for HIV. However, participants reported significantly fewer unprotected vaginal and anal sexual occasions and increased intentions to engage in risk preventative behaviors 3 months after leaving shelter compared with the 3 months before shelter. Additionally, participants reported significant improvements on HIV risk factors addressed in SAFE-IPV at the 3-month follow-up (i.e., reduced emotional, physical, and sexual harm by abuser, posttraumatic stress symptoms, hazardous alcohol use, and drug use). DISCUSSION: These results extend prior research on HIV prevention with women with IPV, demonstrating the acceptability, feasibility, and initial efficacy of SAFE-IPV within battered women's shelter settings.
Authors: Deborah Y Phillips; Brad Walsh; John W Bullion; Paula V Reid; Katherine Bacon; Ngozi Okoro Journal: J Assoc Nurses AIDS Care Date: 2013-11-08 Impact factor: 1.354
Authors: Donna Hubbard McCree; Linda J Koenig; Kathleen C Basile; Dawnovise Fowler; Yvonne Green Journal: J Womens Health (Larchmt) Date: 2015-05 Impact factor: 2.681
Authors: Ruth M Harris; Phyllis W Sharps; Karen Allen; Elizabeth H Anderson; Karen Soeken; Acharaporn Rohatas Journal: J Assoc Nurses AIDS Care Date: 2003 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 1.354
Authors: Kayleigh M Prowse; Christine E Logue; Heidi C Fantasia; Melissa A Sutherland Journal: Public Health Nurs Date: 2013-09-30 Impact factor: 1.462
Authors: Christopher D Pilcher; Brian Louie; Shelley Facente; Sheila Keating; John Hackett; Ana Vallari; Chris Hall; Teri Dowling; Michael P Busch; Jeffrey D Klausner; Frederick M Hecht; Sally Liska; Mark W Pandori Journal: PLoS One Date: 2013-12-12 Impact factor: 3.240