A cross-sectional analysis of intimate partner violence and family planning use in rural India

Background: Intimate partner violence (IPV) has been shown to be associated differentially with contraceptive use based on type, with IPV more likely among pill users and less likely among condom users. Recent increases in IUD uptake allow consideration of this type of contraceptive. We assessed the...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Grace L. Chen, Jay G. Silverman, Anvita Dixit, Shahina Begum, Mohan Ghule, Madhusudana Battala, Nicole E. Johns, Anita Raj, Sarah Averbach
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Elsevier 2020-04-01
Series:EClinicalMedicine
Online Access:http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589537020300626
id doaj-a583114fd54348df810a345c835bc212
record_format Article
spelling doaj-a583114fd54348df810a345c835bc2122020-11-25T02:12:53ZengElsevierEClinicalMedicine2589-53702020-04-0121A cross-sectional analysis of intimate partner violence and family planning use in rural IndiaGrace L. Chen0Jay G. Silverman1Anvita Dixit2Shahina Begum3Mohan Ghule4Madhusudana Battala5Nicole E. Johns6Anita Raj7Sarah Averbach8University of California San Diego School of Medicine, 9500 Gilman Drive #0606, La Jolla, CA 92093, United StatesCenter on Gender Equity and Health, University of California San Diego School of Medicine, 9500 Gilman Drive #0507, La Jolla, CA, 92093, United StatesCenter on Gender Equity and Health, University of California San Diego School of Medicine, 9500 Gilman Drive #0507, La Jolla, CA, 92093, United States; Joint Doctoral Program in Public Health, San Diego State University, University of California San Diego, San Diego, CA, United StatesDepartment of Biostatistics, ICMR-National Institute for Research in Reproductive Health, J.M Street, Parel, Mumbai 400012, IndiaCenter on Gender Equity and Health, University of California San Diego School of Medicine, 9500 Gilman Drive #0507, La Jolla, CA, 92093, United StatesPopulation Council, Zone 5A, Ground Floor, India Habitat Center, Lodi Road, New Delhi 110003, IndiaCenter on Gender Equity and Health, University of California San Diego School of Medicine, 9500 Gilman Drive #0507, La Jolla, CA, 92093, United StatesCenter on Gender Equity and Health, University of California San Diego School of Medicine, 9500 Gilman Drive #0507, La Jolla, CA, 92093, United StatesCenter on Gender Equity and Health, University of California San Diego School of Medicine, 9500 Gilman Drive #0507, La Jolla, CA, 92093, United States; Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences, University of California San Diego School of Medicine, 9300 Campus Point Drive #7433, La Jolla, CA 92037, USA; Corresponding author at: Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences, University of California San Diego School of Medicine, 9300 Campus Point Drive #7433, La Jolla, CA 92037, USA.Background: Intimate partner violence (IPV) has been shown to be associated differentially with contraceptive use based on type, with IPV more likely among pill users and less likely among condom users. Recent increases in IUD uptake allow consideration of this type of contraceptive. We assessed the association between self-reported IPV and self-reported contraceptive use, by type, among non-pregnant married women in rural India in a region with higher than average IUD use. Methods: We assessed the association between past 12-month IPV (physical, sexual, or any) and past 3-month contraceptive use (condom, pill, IUD, or any modern method) using crude and adjusted multinomial logistic regression models. Findings: Among the 1001 women included, 109 (10·9%) reported experiencing physical IPV and 27 (2·7%) reported experiencing sexual IPV in the past 12 months. Women experiencing physical IPV were significantly less likely to use condoms (adjusted relative risk ratio [RRR]: 0·54, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0·30–0·98, p = 0·042) than women not experiencing violence. There was a trend towards increased IUD use among women experiencing physical IPV (adjusted RRR: 1·78, 95% CI: 0·91–3·41, p = 0·091) compared to those not experiencing physical IPV, but this did not reach statistical significance. Interpretation: Our findings suggest that women who experience physical IPV in India are less likely to use condoms and may be more likely to use IUDs than women without exposure to IPV. This research expands on prior findings suggesting higher uptake of women-controlled contraceptives among women contending with IPV in India. Keywords: Intimate partner violence (IPV), Contraception, Family planning, Reproductive health, Indiahttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589537020300626
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Grace L. Chen
Jay G. Silverman
Anvita Dixit
Shahina Begum
Mohan Ghule
Madhusudana Battala
Nicole E. Johns
Anita Raj
Sarah Averbach
spellingShingle Grace L. Chen
Jay G. Silverman
Anvita Dixit
Shahina Begum
Mohan Ghule
Madhusudana Battala
Nicole E. Johns
Anita Raj
Sarah Averbach
A cross-sectional analysis of intimate partner violence and family planning use in rural India
EClinicalMedicine
author_facet Grace L. Chen
Jay G. Silverman
Anvita Dixit
Shahina Begum
Mohan Ghule
Madhusudana Battala
Nicole E. Johns
Anita Raj
Sarah Averbach
author_sort Grace L. Chen
title A cross-sectional analysis of intimate partner violence and family planning use in rural India
title_short A cross-sectional analysis of intimate partner violence and family planning use in rural India
title_full A cross-sectional analysis of intimate partner violence and family planning use in rural India
title_fullStr A cross-sectional analysis of intimate partner violence and family planning use in rural India
title_full_unstemmed A cross-sectional analysis of intimate partner violence and family planning use in rural India
title_sort cross-sectional analysis of intimate partner violence and family planning use in rural india
publisher Elsevier
series EClinicalMedicine
issn 2589-5370
publishDate 2020-04-01
description Background: Intimate partner violence (IPV) has been shown to be associated differentially with contraceptive use based on type, with IPV more likely among pill users and less likely among condom users. Recent increases in IUD uptake allow consideration of this type of contraceptive. We assessed the association between self-reported IPV and self-reported contraceptive use, by type, among non-pregnant married women in rural India in a region with higher than average IUD use. Methods: We assessed the association between past 12-month IPV (physical, sexual, or any) and past 3-month contraceptive use (condom, pill, IUD, or any modern method) using crude and adjusted multinomial logistic regression models. Findings: Among the 1001 women included, 109 (10·9%) reported experiencing physical IPV and 27 (2·7%) reported experiencing sexual IPV in the past 12 months. Women experiencing physical IPV were significantly less likely to use condoms (adjusted relative risk ratio [RRR]: 0·54, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0·30–0·98, p = 0·042) than women not experiencing violence. There was a trend towards increased IUD use among women experiencing physical IPV (adjusted RRR: 1·78, 95% CI: 0·91–3·41, p = 0·091) compared to those not experiencing physical IPV, but this did not reach statistical significance. Interpretation: Our findings suggest that women who experience physical IPV in India are less likely to use condoms and may be more likely to use IUDs than women without exposure to IPV. This research expands on prior findings suggesting higher uptake of women-controlled contraceptives among women contending with IPV in India. Keywords: Intimate partner violence (IPV), Contraception, Family planning, Reproductive health, India
url http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2589537020300626
work_keys_str_mv AT gracelchen acrosssectionalanalysisofintimatepartnerviolenceandfamilyplanninguseinruralindia
AT jaygsilverman acrosssectionalanalysisofintimatepartnerviolenceandfamilyplanninguseinruralindia
AT anvitadixit acrosssectionalanalysisofintimatepartnerviolenceandfamilyplanninguseinruralindia
AT shahinabegum acrosssectionalanalysisofintimatepartnerviolenceandfamilyplanninguseinruralindia
AT mohanghule acrosssectionalanalysisofintimatepartnerviolenceandfamilyplanninguseinruralindia
AT madhusudanabattala acrosssectionalanalysisofintimatepartnerviolenceandfamilyplanninguseinruralindia
AT nicoleejohns acrosssectionalanalysisofintimatepartnerviolenceandfamilyplanninguseinruralindia
AT anitaraj acrosssectionalanalysisofintimatepartnerviolenceandfamilyplanninguseinruralindia
AT sarahaverbach acrosssectionalanalysisofintimatepartnerviolenceandfamilyplanninguseinruralindia
AT gracelchen crosssectionalanalysisofintimatepartnerviolenceandfamilyplanninguseinruralindia
AT jaygsilverman crosssectionalanalysisofintimatepartnerviolenceandfamilyplanninguseinruralindia
AT anvitadixit crosssectionalanalysisofintimatepartnerviolenceandfamilyplanninguseinruralindia
AT shahinabegum crosssectionalanalysisofintimatepartnerviolenceandfamilyplanninguseinruralindia
AT mohanghule crosssectionalanalysisofintimatepartnerviolenceandfamilyplanninguseinruralindia
AT madhusudanabattala crosssectionalanalysisofintimatepartnerviolenceandfamilyplanninguseinruralindia
AT nicoleejohns crosssectionalanalysisofintimatepartnerviolenceandfamilyplanninguseinruralindia
AT anitaraj crosssectionalanalysisofintimatepartnerviolenceandfamilyplanninguseinruralindia
AT sarahaverbach crosssectionalanalysisofintimatepartnerviolenceandfamilyplanninguseinruralindia
_version_ 1724907632030908416