Hausmann Laura M, Seefeld Lara, Mojahed Amera, Mack Judith T, Garthus-Niegel Susan, Schellong Julia
Institute and Policlinic of Occupational and Social Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Dresden, Germany.
Department of Psychotherapy and Psychosomatic Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus, TUD Dresden University of Technology, Dresden, Germany.
BMC Public Health. 2025 Jan 2;25(1):2. doi: 10.1186/s12889-024-20921-y.
Women in the postpartum period are at greater risk of intimate partner violence (IPV), which may cause physical, sexual, or psychological harm and have a long-lasting negative impact on mother and child. Seeking help in case of IPV in the postpartum period can be difficult.
The purpose of this study was to examine service preferences among postpartum women in Germany (non-)affected by IPV.
In the cross-sectional study INVITE, postpartum mothers (n = 3,509) were interviewed via telephone. Using the WHO-Violence Against Women Instrument (WHO-VAWI), women were divided into groups: non-affected women and women affected by psychological, physical, and/or sexual IPV. Using analyses of variance, group differences regarding preferred services and modes of service provision were assessed. Examined service domains were psychosocial services (e.g., women´s shelter or self-help groups), medical services (e.g., gynecologist or emergency room), and midwives. Modes of service provision included direct communication (e.g., in person or video conference) and indirect communication (e.g., chat or e-mail).
People from the women's social environment (e.g., family, friends) and specialized IPV services, such as women's shelters, were the most preferred support. Regarding service categories, women who experienced any type of IPV rated all three service domains less likely to be used than non-affected women. Most preferred provision mode was "in person". Women affected by physical and/or sexual IPV rated direct modes more negatively than non-affected women. However, there were no differences between (non-)affected women regarding indirect modes, such as e-mails or apps.
The present results indicate that services were rated less likely to be used by postpartum women affected by IPV. Potential barriers which lead to these ratings need to be investigated. Efforts should be made to increase awareness of IPV and the beneficial effects of support.
产后女性遭受亲密伴侣暴力(IPV)的风险更高,这可能会导致身体、性或心理伤害,并对母婴产生长期的负面影响。产后遭遇IPV时寻求帮助可能会很困难。
本研究旨在调查德国受(未受)IPV影响的产后女性的服务偏好。
在横断面研究INVITE中,通过电话采访了产后母亲(n = 3509)。使用世界卫生组织针对妇女的暴力行为工具(WHO-VAWI),将女性分为几组:未受影响的女性以及受心理、身体和/或性IPV影响的女性。使用方差分析评估在首选服务和服务提供方式方面的组间差异。所考察的服务领域包括心理社会服务(如妇女庇护所或自助团体)、医疗服务(如妇科医生或急诊室)以及助产士。服务提供方式包括直接沟通(如亲自面谈或视频会议)和间接沟通(如聊天或电子邮件)。
来自女性社交环境的人(如家人、朋友)以及专门的IPV服务机构,如妇女庇护所,是最受欢迎的支持来源。在服务类别方面,经历过任何类型IPV的女性认为所有三个服务领域的使用可能性均低于未受影响的女性。最受欢迎的提供方式是“亲自面谈”。遭受身体和/或性IPV影响的女性对直接方式的评价比未受影响的女性更负面。然而,在未受影响的女性之间,对于电子邮件或应用程序等间接方式没有差异。
目前的结果表明,受IPV影响的产后女性认为这些服务的使用可能性较低。需要调查导致这些评价的潜在障碍。应努力提高对IPV的认识以及支持的有益效果。