The impact of SASA!, a community mobilisation intervention, on women's experiences of intimate partner violence: secondary findings from a cluster randomised trial in Kampala, Uganda
The impact of SASA!, a community mobilisation intervention, on women's experiences of intimate partner violence: secondary findings from a cluster randomised trial in Kampala, Uganda
复制标题
DOI：
10.1136/jech-2015-206665
复制
发表时间：
2016-08-01
影响因子：
6.3
通讯作者：
Watts, Charlotte
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Abramsky, Tanya;Devries, Karen M.;Watts, Charlotte
背景亲密伴侣暴力（IPV）是一个全球性的公共卫生和人权问题，但如何预防它的证据有限。这是对SASA数据的二次分析！研究评估了潜在的社区动员IPV预防干预，以减少IPV的总体患病率，新发滥用（一级预防）和继续以前的滥用（二级预防）。方法在乌干达坎帕拉（2007-2012年）8个社区（4干预，4控制）进行配对分组随机对照试验。在基线（n=1583）和干预实施后4年（n=2532）对18-49岁的社区成员进行横断面调查。结果涉及妇女过去一年的身体和性IPV，情绪攻击，控制行为和恐惧的合作伙伴的经验。一个调整后的聚类水平的意向治疗分析比较结果在干预和控制社区在follow-up.Results随访时，所有类型的IPV（包括每一个严重的形式）干预社区与控制社区相比，均较低。莎莎与较低的开始滥用和较低的持续先前的滥用。观察到持续物理IPV的统计学显著性影响（调整后的风险比0.42，95% CI 0.18 - 0.96）;持续性IPV（0.68，0.53至0.87）;持续的情绪攻击（0.68，0.52至0.89）;持续害怕伴侣（0.67，0.51 ~ 0.89）;和新的控制行为的开始（0.38，0.23至0.62）。结论社区动员是一种有效的手段，IPV的一级和二级预防。应进一步支持复制和扩大小武器行动系统！以及其他类似的干预措施。
Background Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a global public health and human rights concern, though there is limited evidence on how to prevent it. This secondary analysis of data from the SASA! Study assesses the potential of a community mobilisation IPV prevention intervention to reduce overall prevalence of IPV, new onset of abuse (primary prevention) and continuation of prior abuse (secondary prevention).Methods A pair-matched cluster randomised controlled trial was conducted in 8 communities (4 intervention, 4 control) in Kampala, Uganda (2007-2012). Cross-sectional surveys of community members, 18-49 years old, were undertaken at baseline (n=1583) and 4 years postintervention implementation (n=2532). Outcomes relate to women's past year experiences of physical and sexual IPV, emotional aggression, controlling behaviours and fear of partner. An adjusted cluster-level intention-to-treat analysis compared outcomes in intervention and control communities at follow-up.Results At follow-up, all types of IPV (including severe forms of each) were lower in intervention communities compared with control communities. SASA! was associated with lower onset of abuse and lower continuation of prior abuse. Statistically significant effects were observed for continued physical IPV (adjusted risk ratio 0.42, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.96); continued sexual IPV (0.68, 0.53 to 0.87); continued emotional aggression (0.68, 0.52 to 0.89); continued fear of partner (0.67, 0.51 to 0.89); and new onset of controlling behaviours (0.38, 0.23 to 0.62).Conclusions Community mobilisation is an effective means for both primary and secondary prevention of IPV. Further support should be given to the replication and scale up of SASA! and other similar interventions.