Mojahed Amera, Alaidarous Nada, Kopp Marie, Pogarell Anneke, Thiel Freya, Garthus-Niegel Susan
Institute and Policlinic of Occupational and Social Medicine, Medical Faculty, Technical University of Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Arthur Labatt Family School of Nursing, University of Western Ontario, London, ON, Canada.
Front Psychiatry. 2021 Feb 9;12:601236. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2021.601236. eCollection 2021.
Intimate partner violence (IPV) affects individuals and families from all backgrounds, regardless of their ethnicity, socio-economic status, sexual orientation, or religion. Pregnancy and childbirth could be a time of vulnerability to violence because of changes in physical, emotional, social, and economic demands and needs. Prevalence of IPV against women during the perinatal period is increasingly researched and documented. However, evidence on IPV prevalence among intimate partners as well as on the course of IPV over the perinatal period is scarce. The purpose of this review was to provide a narrative synthesis of the existing literature regarding the prevalence estimates of IPV among intimate partners over the perinatal period. Through this review, we also gained better insight into associated factors, as well as the various forms of IPV. Of the 766 studies assessing prevalence estimates identified, 86 were included, where 80 studies focused on unidirectional IPV (i.e., perpetrated by men against women) and six studies investigated bidirectional IPV (i.e., IPV perpetrated by both partners). Most of the included studies reported lower overall prevalence rates for unidirectional IPV postpartum (range: 2-58%) compared to pregnancy (range: 1.5-66.9%). Psychological violence was found to be the most prevalent form of violence during the entire perinatal period. Studies on bidirectional IPV mostly reported women's perpetration to be almost as high as that of their partner or even higher, yet their findings need to be interpreted with caution. In addition, our results also highlighted the associated factors of IPV among partners, in which they were assimilated into a multi-level ecological model and were analyzed through an intersectional framework. Based on our findings, IPV is found to be highly prevalent during the entire perinatal period and in populations suffering from social inequalities. Further research exploring not only the occurrence, but also the motivations and the context of the bidirectionality of IPV during the perinatal period may facilitate better understanding of the detrimental consequences on partners and their families, as well as the development of effective intervention strategies. Public health prevention approaches intervening at optimal times during the perinatal period are also needed.
亲密伴侣暴力（IPV）影响着所有背景的个人和家庭，无论其种族、社会经济地位、性取向或宗教信仰如何。怀孕和分娩期间，由于身体、情感、社会和经济需求的变化，可能会成为遭受暴力的脆弱时期。围产期针对女性的亲密伴侣暴力患病率越来越多地受到研究和记录。然而，关于亲密伴侣之间亲密伴侣暴力患病率以及围产期亲密伴侣暴力发展过程的证据却很匮乏。本综述的目的是对现有文献进行叙述性综合，以了解围产期亲密伴侣之间亲密伴侣暴力患病率的估计情况。通过本综述，我们还更好地了解了相关因素以及亲密伴侣暴力的各种形式。在评估患病率估计的766项研究中，纳入了86项，其中80项研究关注单向亲密伴侣暴力（即男性对女性实施的暴力），6项研究调查了双向亲密伴侣暴力（即双方伴侣都实施的亲密伴侣暴力）。大多数纳入研究报告称，与孕期（范围：1.5 - 66.9%）相比，产后单向亲密伴侣暴力的总体患病率较低（范围：2 - 58%）。在整个围产期，心理暴力被发现是最普遍的暴力形式。关于双向亲密伴侣暴力的研究大多报告称，女性实施暴力的情况几乎与伴侣相当，甚至更高，但其研究结果需要谨慎解读。此外，我们的结果还突出了伴侣间亲密伴侣暴力的相关因素，这些因素被纳入多层次生态模型，并通过交叉性框架进行分析。基于我们的研究结果，发现亲密伴侣暴力在整个围产期以及遭受社会不平等的人群中高度普遍。进一步的研究不仅要探索亲密伴侣暴力的发生情况，还要探索围产期双向亲密伴侣暴力的动机和背景，这可能有助于更好地理解其对伴侣及其家庭的有害影响，以及制定有效的干预策略。还需要在围产期的最佳时机采取公共卫生预防措施。
