Zapata Anairany, Wood Leila G, Galvin Annalynn M, Chan Wenyaw, Thomas Timothy A, Tsai Jack, Way Heather K, Mueller Elizabeth J, Hernandez Daphne C
Cizik School of Nursing, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, TX 77030, USA.
McGovern Medical School, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, TX 77030, USA.
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2025 Jul 31;22(8):1212. doi: 10.3390/ijerph22081212.
While IPV is often studied as a predictor of housing insecurity, few U.S. studies explore how different forms of housing instability may contribute to intimate partner violence (IPV) risk. Using a mixed-methods approach and a cross-sectional design, this study examined the association between four housing instability domains and IPV among a sample of tenants that had either experienced eviction or were at high risk for eviction. Tenants in Harris and Travis counties (Texas, USA) completed an online survey ( = 1085; March-July 2024). Housing instability was assessed across four domains: homelessness, lease violations, utility hardship, and poor housing quality. IPV was measured using the Hurt, Insult, Threaten, Scream Screener. Covariate-adjusted logistic regression models suggest indicators within the four housing instability domains were associated with IPV risk. Within the homelessness domain, experiences with lifetime homelessness (AOR = 1.92, 95%CI 1.61-2.28), in the past 12 months living in unconventional spaces (AOR = 2.10, 95%CI 1.92-2.29), and moving in with others (AOR = 1.20, 95%CI 1.06-1.36) were associated with IPV. Within the lease violations domain, missed rent payments (AOR = 1.69, 95%CI 1.68-1.71) and non-payment lease violations (AOR = 2.50, 95%CI 2.29-2.73) in the past 12 months were associated with IPV. Utility shutoffs (AOR = 1.62, 95%CI 1.37-1.91) and unsafe housing (AOR = 1.65, 95%CI 1.31-2.09) in the past 12 months were associated with IPV. Homelessness, housing-related economic hardships and substandard living conditions predict an elevated risk of IPV.
虽然亲密伴侣暴力（IPV）常被作为住房不安全的一个预测因素来研究，但美国很少有研究探讨不同形式的住房不稳定如何可能导致亲密伴侣暴力风险。本研究采用混合方法和横断面设计，在经历过驱逐或有高驱逐风险的租户样本中，考察了四个住房不稳定领域与亲密伴侣暴力之间的关联。美国得克萨斯州哈里斯县和特拉维斯县的租户完成了一项在线调查（n = 1085；2024年3月至7月）。住房不稳定通过四个领域进行评估：无家可归、违反租约、水电困境和住房质量差。亲密伴侣暴力使用“伤害、侮辱、威胁、尖叫筛查器”进行测量。协变量调整后的逻辑回归模型表明，四个住房不稳定领域内的指标与亲密伴侣暴力风险相关。在无家可归领域，一生无家可归的经历（调整后比值比[AOR]=1.92，95%置信区间[CI]1.61 - 2.28）、过去12个月居住在非传统空间（AOR = 2.10，95%CI 1.92 - 2.29）以及搬去与他人同住（AOR = 1.20，95%CI 1.06 - 1.36）与亲密伴侣暴力相关。在违反租约领域，过去12个月未支付租金（AOR = 1.69，95%CI 1.68 - 1.71）和未支付租约违规行为（AOR = 2.50，95%CI 2.29 - 2.73）与亲密伴侣暴力相关。过去12个月的水电切断（AOR = 1.62，95%CI 1.37 - 1.91）和不安全住房（AOR = 1.65，95%CI 1.31 - 2.09）与亲密伴侣暴力相关。无家可归、与住房相关的经济困难和不合标准的生活条件预示着亲密伴侣暴力风险升高。
