 |
|
Intimate Partner Violence and Physical Health Consequences
Jacquelyn Campbell, PhD, RN;
Alison Snow Jones, PhD;
Jacqueline Dienemann, PhD, RN;
Joan Kub, PhD, RN;
Janet Schollenberger, MHS;
Patricia O'Campo, PhD;
Andrea Carlson Gielen, PhD;
Clifford Wynne, MD
Arch Intern Med. 2002;162:1157-1163.
ABSTRACT
| |
Background Domestic violence results in long-term and immediate health problems.
This study compared selected physical health problems of abused and never
abused women with similar access to health care.
Methods A case-control study of enrollees in a multisite metropolitan health
maintenance organization sampled 2535 women enrollees aged 21 to 55 years
who responded to an invitation to participate; 447 (18%) could not be contacted,
7 (0.3%) were ineligible, and 76 (3%) refused, yielding a sample of 2005.
The Abuse Assessment Screen identified women physically and/or sexually abused
between January 1, 1989, and December 31, 1997, resulting in 201 cases. The
240 controls were a random sample of never abused women. The general health
perceptions subscale of the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short-Form Health
Survey measured general health. The Miller Abuse Physical Symptom and Injury
Scale measured abuse-specific health problems.
Results Cases and controls differed in ethnicity, marital status, educational
level, and income. Direct weights were used to standardize for comparisons.
Significance was tested using logistic and negative binomial regressions.
Abused women had more (P<.05) headaches, back
pain, sexually transmitted diseases, vaginal bleeding, vaginal infections,
pelvic pain, painful intercourse, urinary tract infections, appetite loss,
abdominal pain, and digestive problems. Abused women also had more (P .001) gynecological, chronic stress–related,
central nervous system, and total health problems.
Conclusions Abused women have a 50% to 70% increase in gynecological, central nervous
system, and stress-related problems, with women sexually and physically abused
most likely to report problems. Routine universal screening and sensitive
in-depth assessment of women presenting with frequent gynecological, chronic
stress–related, or central nervous system complaints are needed to support
disclosure of domestic violence.
INTRODUCTION
THERE IS mounting evidence that domestic violence (DV) has long-term
negative health consequences for survivors, even after the abuse has ended.
This can translate into lower health status, lower quality of life, and higher
utilization of health services.1-4
There is no agreement on the constellation of signs, symptoms, and illnesses
that a primary care physician should recognize as associated with a current
or prior history of DV.5-9
Agreement on such a compilation could alert practitioners about when to probe
for DV in the patient's history. In addition, this constellation could serve
as a basis for a standard targeted physical examination to be used with all
female patients who have been abused. As one step toward informing the development
of such a standard, this study elicits and describes information about signs,
symptoms, and illnesses from subjects whose history of physical abuse is known.
It also investigates differences in the effects of physical vs sexual intimate
partner abuse. Last, it uses a sample of predominantly middle-class working
women to investigate whether the health effects of DV in this group differ
from those reported by other researchers from samples that consist of primarily
lower-income women.
Domestic violence is a significant risk factor for various physical
health problems frequently encountered in primary care settings. The most
common locations for injuries among battered women are the face, neck, upper
torso, breast, or abdomen.5 These are the short-term
consequences of battering that most health care professionals associate with
DV. Yet, studies of battered women have found that the long-term aftermath
of these injuries and the fear and stress associated with having an abusive
intimate partner can result in several less obvious, and often long-term,
health problems. These include pain or discomfort from recurring central nervous
system (CNS) symptoms, such as headaches, back pain, fainting, or seizures.6-15
Battered women also exhibit more signs, symptoms, and illnesses associated
with chronic fear and stress, such as functional gastrointestinal disorders
and appetite loss,6, 8-9,16
viral infections, such as colds and flu,6, 17-18
and cardiac problems, such as hypertension and chest pain.8, 18-19
Researchers have found battered women more likely to have gynecological (GYN)
symptoms, such as sexually transmitted diseases, vaginal bleeding or infection,
fibroids, pelvic pain, and urinary tract infections, all of which are also
associated with sexual abuse.6-9,18, 20-23
Of the women who are physically abused by their intimate partners, 40% to
45% are forced into sexual activities by the partner. Another smaller percentage
are sexually abused by their intimate partner, but not physically abused.4, 24-25 Sexual assault could
explain the high prevalence of GYN problems reported by battered women. However,
none of the studies measured forced sex separately.
Researchers6-9
studied the health consequences of DV in 4 roughly comparable samples of women,
but there was not always agreement about the types of health problems to investigate.
For example, 2 studies8-9 investigated
digestive problems and 26-7 did
not. These differences may reflect the variety of possible somatic responses
to trauma and the different types of injuries abused women can experience.
Despite the observed variability in patterns of health problems reported in
these studies, there is agreement that battering has long-term emotional and
physical health effects.26-27
PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS
SAMPLE
The sample is drawn from female health maintenance organization enrollees
in the metropolitan Washington, DC, area. It represents a racially balanced
and primarily highly educated group of middle-class working women. After Institutional
Review Board approval from the participating Washington-area health maintenance
organization at the national and regional levels, letters of invitation were
sent to 21 426 women between the ages of 21 and 55 years who were continuously
enrolled from January 1, 1995, through December 31, 1997. For safety reasons,
letters (mailed in the fall of 1997 and the fall of 1998) did not mention
abuse. They asked women to participate in a women's health survey. Twelve
percent (n = 2535) responded, indicating a time and telephone number where
they could be reached for a private interview.
A professional survey company, whose interviewers were trained by the
investigators (J.C., J.D., J.K., J.S., and A.C.G.), was used to conduct all
interviews. At telephone contact, the interviewer described the nature of
the study and obtained verbal consent. Of the 2535 women, 447 (18%) could
not be located, 7 (0.3%) were ineligible because they were no longer enrolled,
and 76 (3%) refused to participate, yielding a sample of 2005 women (79% of
those eligible) who completed abuse screening interviews. Demographic information
about eligible women who did not participate in the study was not available
from the health maintenance organization. Consequently, no comparisons between
the sample and the larger population can be made.
CASES AND CONTROLS
A modified version of the Abuse Assessment Screen28
was administered to all 2005 women. Intimate partner violence (IPV) was defined
as physical and/or sexual assault by a husband, partner, ex-husband, or ex-partner.29 Three questions were used to identify women who had
experienced IPV: Have you ever as an adult been physically abused by a husband,
boyfriend, or female partner? Have you ever been hit, slapped, kicked, pushed
or shoved, or otherwise physically hurt by a current or previous husband,
boyfriend, or female partner? Have you ever been forced into sexual activities
by a husband, boyfriend, or female partner? Two hundred one women (cases)
responded yes to 1 or more of these questions and indicated that the abuse
occurred between January 1, 1989, and December 31, 1997. The restriction on
period for abuse was chosen to allow for development of health consequences
without substantially interfering with the woman's ability to recall severity
or other descriptive characteristics. Cases participated in an in-depth interview.
A random sample of 240 women (controls) was drawn from those who reported
never having experienced abuse and having been in an intimate relationship.
These women were administered the same in-depth interview. Respondents to
this interview received $15 sent by check to an address of their choice. A
protocol derived from the Canadian DV telephone survey safety protocol of
Johnson and Sacco30 was used.
The sociodemographic characteristics of the sample are displayed in Table 1. Cases and controls differed significantly
on all indicators except age. Cases were less likely to be college graduates,
white, and married and to have an annual household income of $50 000
or more. (Abused women may be more likely to be single or divorced because
of decisions to leave abusive relationships. This would tend to lower their
household incomes relative to never abused women, who are more likely to be
married and in a household with 2 incomes. Jones et al31
provide further information on race and income differences as risk factors.)
In our original analysis,31 we found race and
less than college education to be risk factors for DV. Because of these differences,
weights were constructed as described later to standardize the 2 groups on
these factors.
|
|
|
|
Table 1. Sociodemographic Characteristics of Abused and Never Abused
Women (Unweighted)*
|
|
|
HEALTH MEASURES
Overall general health was measured using the general health perceptions
subscale of the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey, which
has established reliability for diverse populations.32
Physical health problems were measured by a modification of the Miller Abuse
Physical Symptom and Injury Scale. This self-report scale lists 25 injuries,
conditions, symptoms, and illnesses related to DV and asks if the woman visited
a physician or nurse for this problem in the past 12 months. The scale was
designed specifically for measuring long-term health consequences of battering.
Content validity was established by an expert panel, and its test-retest reliability
during a 2-year period on the history of violent injury portion was 0.63.33 The Cronbach  test for reliability of the
Miller Abuse Physical Symptom and Injury Scale in this study was 0.67.
In addition to specific health problems, 8 GYN symptoms or conditions,
5 chronic stress–related (ChS) symptoms or conditions, and 4 CNS problems
were clustered, as indicated in Table 2. Internal relatedness was moderate among the items in the groups,
as shown by Spearman  correlations between all possible pairs in each
grouping (GYN problems, 14 of 21 pairs; ChS problems, 6 of 10 pairs; and CNS
problems, 4 of 6 pairs; P.05).
|
|
|
|
Table 2. Perceptions of General Health and Health Problems Reported
by Abused and Never Abused Women in the Past Year (Weighted)*
|
|
|
WEIGHTING AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
In calculating the differences in proportions between cases and controls,
methods of direct adjustment were used to control for differences between
the 2 groups in educational level, race, income, and marital status.34 The standard population was the group of women who
were screened for eligibility for this study (N = 2005). This group was viewed
as most representative of the population of interest, ie, a group of active
female health maintenance organization enrollees. The weights were obtained
by stratifying cases, controls, and the standard population separately on
the 4 unbalanced variables. Contrasts were as follows: educational level (graduate
degree, any college or 4-year college degree, and high school degree or less),
race (white and all other), annual household income (<$50 000 and  $50 000),
and marital status (married and all others). For each group, the cell frequency
for each stratum was identified. Then, stratum-specific ratios of the cell
frequency for the standard population were obtained. Weights were created
for cases and controls by applying the stratum-specific ratio to each person
within each stratum.
All proportions presented are based on the weighted data. However, because
the weighted sample is much larger than the actual number of cases and controls,
standard hypothesis tests based on comparisons of means or proportions would
produce incorrect significance levels (ie, smaller SEs). To circumvent this
problem and obtain correct estimates of statistical significance, analyses
of the presence or absence of a single health problem were conducted using
logistic regressions that included regressors to control for the factors that
were unbalanced in the 2 groups. For counts of health problems, a negative
binomial regression was used because it is a maximum likelihood method that
is appropriate for overdispersed count data. (Count data are frequently modeled
using Poisson maximum-likelihood regression. However, this distributional
assumption requires that the mean of the distribution is equal to the variance.
As is often the case with survey data, the variance of the study data was
larger than the mean. Use of the negative binomial distribution relaxes the
strict mean-variance relationship of the Poisson distribution, allowing the
variance to exceed the mean.) Negative binomial regression, like Poisson regression,
has the added advantage that coefficient estimates can be easily transformed
to give the incidence rate ratio. (The transformation is like that for logistic
regression coefficients when one wants to express them as odds ratios.) This
yields a result that can be interpreted as the percentage increase in total
number of symptoms for cases relative to controls.
RESULTS
GENERAL HEALTH
When asked to assess their general health, similar proportions of cases
and controls estimated their health as good. However, when extremes of health
status were examined, statistically significant differences between the 2
groups were observed (Table 2). At the lower extreme, 12% of abused women rated their health as fair to poor
compared with 6% of never abused women. At the other extreme, 35% of never
abused women rated their health as excellent in contrast to only 26% of abused
women.
SPECIFIC PHYSICAL HEALTH PROBLEMS
Headache, back pain, vaginal infection, and digestive problems are the
most frequently reported problems in both groups, and each was significantly
(P<.05) more frequently reported by abused women
(Table 2). Other, less frequently
occurring problems, were also reported significantly (P<.05) more frequently by abused women: sexually transmitted diseases,
vaginal bleeding, painful intercourse, pelvic pain, urinary tract infection,
loss of appetite, and abdominal pain. A significantly higher total number
of health problems was reported by abused women (P<.05).
When health problems were analyzed in clusters (GYN, ChS, and CNS problems),
abused women reported 1, 2, or 3 or more problems more frequently.
NUMBER OF PHYSICAL HEALTH PROBLEMS
Comparisons of total health problems overall and within health problem
clusters indicate that abused women had a roughly 60% higher rate of all problems
relative to never abused women (incidence rate ratio, 1.58; 95% confidence
interval, 1.34-1.86; P.001). Negative binomial
regression results indicate that incidence rate ratios range between 1.5 and
1.7 for the 3 health problem groups (P.001).
SEXUAL ABUSE AND HEALTH PROBLEMS
Women who were sexually abused (with or without physical abuse) were
more likely to have had 1 or more ChS or CNS health problems compared with
physically abused women who did not report sexual abuse and never abused women.
Interestingly, women who report only physical abuse are as likely to report
at least 1 GYN problem as those who report sexual abuse (59% for both). Both
groups were more likely to report at least 1 GYN problem than controls (42%, P<.005). However, when the number of GYN problems was
examined, a significant difference was apparent. Among women who experienced
sexual abuse with or without physical abuse, 30% reported 3 or more GYN health
problems compared with only 8% of those who experienced physical abuse alone
(P<.001) and 6% of those never abused (P<.001).
Another large difference was seen with ChS problems; 78% of sexually
abused women reported at least 1 ChS problem compared with 54% of women who
reported only physical abuse (P<.001) and 45%
of never abused women (P<.001). The differences
in CNS symptoms among the 3 groups demonstrate the same patterns and similar
magnitudes (69%, sexual abuse; 59%, physical abuse only [P<.10]; and 47%, never abused [P<.001]).
TIMING OF ABUSE
Only health problems that occurred in the 12 months preceding the interview
were reported, but abuse could have occurred as long ago as 1989. Reports
of 1 or more health problems in the 3 symptom clusters were examined relative
to the timing of any reported abuse (abuse before last year, within the last
year, or never). Although not significant, GYN and ChS problems seemed to
be slightly more sensitive to the temporal proximity of the abuse than did
CNS health problems. When the number of symptoms was examined, negative binomial
regressions indicated that more health problems were reported when the lag
between abuse and report was shorter (GYN problems, 1.47 [95% confidence interval,
1.24-1.74]; ChS problems, 1.40 [95% confidence interval, 1.21-1.62]; and CNS
problems, 1.29 [95% confidence interval, 1.12-1.49]).
INJURIES
Few women reported injuries. The highest proportion of injuries ranged
from 10% to 11% for sprains, with never abused women reporting the highest
percentage. The relationship between the temporal proximity of abuse and injuries
in the past year was investigated. Facial injuries were the only injury with
statistically significantly different rates between women abused in the past
12 months and women abused before that (8% vs 1%; P.001).
Women who had never been abused had the lowest rate of facial injuries (0.4%).
Other types of injury differed between women abused in the past 12 months
and women abused before that, but the differences were not statistically significant.
However, these differences may well be clinically important because they are
2 to 3 times larger among currently abused women: injuries requiring surgery
(9% vs 4%; P = .49), bad burns (3% vs 2%; P = .83), and concussions (4% vs 0.6%; P =
.18). They did not achieve statistical significance, probably because of the
low frequency of occurrence. For these same injuries, the differences in rates
between women abused more than 12 months before the interview and never abused
women were within 0.5 percentage point.
COMMENT
LIMITATIONS
Two limitations of this study provide direction for future work. One
is the absence of information about the women's physical or sexual abuse during
childhood. Childhood abuse represents a potential confounding factor for later
health problems. Silva and associates35 found
that 53% of battered women studied reported a history of physical and/or sexual
child abuse, and Hulme36 found that 82% of
women with a history of severe child abuse were battered as adults. McCauley
and associates37 found that battered women
in their primary care sample who were abused as children had long-term health
consequences over and above what could be attributed to IPV. Another limitation
of the present study is the lack of IPV and trauma history over the life course.
Like IPV, all trauma a woman experiences will affect her physical health.
Holman et al38 found that 10% of 1456 adults
interviewed in a low-income primary care clinic had experienced a traumatic
event in the last year and that 57% experienced at least 1 event in their
lifetime. Studies that examine the relationships among childhood abuse, lifetime
trauma, IPV, and physical health problems will provide a better understanding
of the relative effects of these factors on patient health.
RELATIONSHIP TO PREVIOUS RESEARCH
The finding of relationships between previous physical abuse and health
problem clusters is consistent with others' findings of sexual abuse–related
genital injuries (GYN problems),22, 39
physical health problems aggravated by stress (ChS problems),19, 27
and neurological injuries (CNS problems).10, 39
The causative mechanisms behind these findings have not been fully explored
in prior research. This study attempted to verify the plausible hypothesis
that the higher prevalence of GYN symptoms found herein and in other studies
was related to the sexual assault that so often accompanies IPV.40
(It is interesting that in addition to the usual overlap of physical and sexual
abuse, 5% of the women reporting IPV in this sample reported intimate partner
sexual assault as the only form of abuse.) Despite this relationship, forced
sex has seldom been measured separately. Sexually transmitted diseases, pelvic
pain, painful intercourse, fibroids, and urinary tract infections are not
surprising, given battered women's descriptions of the forced anal, vaginal,
and other abusive sex practices they experience.40-42
Less overt, but equally abusive, are partners who have sex with other women
but refuse to use safe sex practices.22 Abused
women report fearing to negotiate condom use because it might lead to further
abuse.43
Contrary to expectation, women who reported forced sex in this sample
were no more likely to report at least 1 GYN problem than those reporting
physical abuse only. However, both abuse groups were more likely to report
at least 1 GYN problem compared with controls. It is possible that the finding
of no difference between the 2 abuse groups is a consequence of underreporting
of forced sex among physically abused women because of its intimate nature.
It is also possible that sexually controlling behaviors, such as affairs and
unsafe sex, which were not measured in this study, are as problematic for
women's GYN health as sexual assault. What is perhaps most interesting from
a clinical standpoint is the finding that the number of GYN problems was greater
among women who reported forced sex compared with either of the other 2 groups.
Also of interest from a clinical standpoint is the finding that women
who were sexually assaulted had a higher probability of at least 1 CNS or
ChS symptom than women who experienced physical abuse only. Both abuse groups
were more likely than the never abused group to report at least 1 of these
types of symptoms. The higher probability of ChS symptoms among women who
report sexual assault could reflect deep shame related to any experience of
sexual assault.24 Alternatively, forced sex
may serve as a proxy for more severe abuse.
The generally higher rate of ChS physical symptoms (eg, hypertension,
chronic irritable bowel disorder, colds, and flu) found in abused women in
this and other studies is most likely a consequence of physiological responses
activated by abuse-induced stress. Increased or prolonged levels of stress
could also potentiate or promote early expression of genetic factors or other
lifestyle risks that lead to the development of these health problems.16 Stress is known to depress the immune system, which
could account for the observed higher rates of cold and flu symptoms. Research
that leads to a better understanding of the causes of increased stress-related
and immune suppression–related symptoms and syndromes in battered women
is clearly warranted.
CLINICAL APPLICATIONS
Many of the symptoms found in this study and by others to be related
to IPV are difficult to diagnose and/or hard to treat or control. Physicians
who do not routinely screen for abuse may waste valuable time searching for
other explanations or prescribing treatments that an abused woman will find
impossible to follow (such as decreasing stress or using safe sex practices).
This is one of the reasons that many health care professionals recommend routine
screening for IPV according to a protocol developed by an interdisciplinary
team of health care professionals expert in IPV.44
These guidelines recommend that women be screened in primary care settings
at their periodic (especially GYN) examinations and at all visits for a new
complaint.
Findings about partner sexual abuse demonstrate the need to routinely
ask specifically about this aspect of IPV, particularly when multiple GYN
symptoms are present. The Abuse Assessment Screen is a 4-question screen with
established reliability and validity that has a separate forced sex question.28 Physicians need to develop comfort in asking patients
about sexual abuse, especially when seen for GYN, ChS, or CNS health problems.
When past or current IPV is identified, primary care physicians should
obtain a focused history and perform a physical examination aimed at assessing
the severity and timing of trauma, injuries, and GYN, CNS, and ChS problems.
When abuse is ongoing, an intervention that conforms to recommended protocols
should be undertaken (as described by Parsons et al45
or Warshaw et al46). A woman may be too embarrassed
to volunteer information about GYN problems or may not realize that other
problems she is experiencing could be treated. Patients may also be experiencing
emotional and psychiatric problems associated with abuse. Knowledge of abuse
history will alert physicians to probe for these problems and conditions.
The temporal proximity of abuse was related to higher numbers of health
problems, but there was also evidence that abused women remained less healthy
over time. Physicians are becoming more aware of the immediate health problems
associated with abuse and need to expand this awareness to those that persist
or develop over time or that occur after the woman has left the abusive relationship.
Many women may not associate these problems with previous abuse and, therefore,
may not disclose abuse. This information may be vital in creating an effective
treatment plan.
CONCLUSIONS
Screening is a necessary first step toward effective intervention and
protection of abused women. However, the results of this study indicate that
routine screening for IPV, which includes questions about forced sex, is important
for women's long-term health and their immediate safety. Injuries, which have
been viewed as the most obvious indicator of physical abuse in clinical settings,
may not identify women who have long-term health problems related to abuse.
Consequently, primary care providers who only screen for IPV when women present
with an injury will miss most women who may be experiencing health problems
as a consequence of abuse.
Some physicians may be uncomfortable with routine screening or believe
that it is unnecessary among higher-income patients. Physicians whose practices
are composed of higher-income working women should be aware that their patients
are also at risk for short- and long-term negative health consequences of
IPV. This sample of better-educated higher-income women had patterns of symptoms
and illness that are similar to those found in lower-income samples. Moreover,
research based on the women in this sample indicates that routine screening
is an acceptable practice for most, even those who have never been abused
(Gielen et al47 provide a full analysis and
discussion).
In the absence of screening or if a woman fails to report abuse to her
physician, the results of this and other studies indicate that there are definite
patterns of symptoms and illness that should alert physicians to probe sensitively
for abuse in the health history. When women present with GYN problems, especially
multiple problems, ChS problems, or CNS problems, primary care physicians
should consider DV as one possible root cause. A sensitive in-depth assessment
of these women can identify this important link. When a woman discloses abuse,
the physician should include a targeted examination for these associated signs,
symptoms, and illnesses and assess their association with the history of abuse.
By doing this, physicians will have a positive effect on the health of women
in their practice.
AUTHOR INFORMATION
Accepted for publication September 26, 2001.
This study was supported by US Army Research Material and Command DAMD
17-96-1-631/RCS DD-HA(OT)2068. Any errors are the authors' own.
Corresponding author and reprints: Jacquelyn Campbell, PhD, RN, School
of Nursing, The Johns Hopkins University, 525 N Wolfe St, Room 436, Baltimore,
MD 21205-2110 (e-mail: JCAMPBEL{at}son.jhmi.edu).
From the School of Nursing (Drs Campbell, Dienemann, and Kub and Ms
Schollenberger) and the Departments of Family and Population Sciences (Dr
O'Campo) and Health, Policy, and Management (Dr Gielen), School of Hygiene
and Public Health, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Md; the Department
of Public Health Sciences, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem,
NC (Dr Jones); and the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Kaiser Permanente,
Washington, DC (Dr Wynne). Dr Dienemann is now with the College of Health
and Human Services, The University of North Carolina at Charlotte; and Ms
Schollenberger is now with the Department of Environmental Health Sciences,
School of Hygiene and Public Health, The Johns Hopkins University.
REFERENCES
| |
1. Tollestrup K, Sklar D, Frost FJ, et al. Health indicators and intimate partner violence among women who are
members of a managed care organization. Prev Med. 1999;29:431-440.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
2. Wisner CL, Gilmer TP, Saltzman LE, Zink TM. Intimate partner violence against women: do victims cost health plans
more? J Fam Pract. 1999;48:439-443.
ISI
| PUBMED
3. McCauley J, Kern DE, Kolodner K, Derogatis LR, Bass EB. Relation of low severity violence to women's health. J Gen Intern Med. 1998;13:687-691.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
4. Tjaden P, Thoennes N. Extent, Nature and Consequences of Intimate Partner
Violence. Washington, DC: US Dept of Justice; 2000. Publication NCJ 181867.
5. Mullerman R, Lenaghan PA, Pakieser RA. Battered women: injury locations and types. Ann Emerg Med. 1996;28:486-492.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
6. Leserman J, Li D, Drossman DA, Hu YJB. Selected symptoms associated with sexual and physical abuse among female
patients with gastrointestinal disorders: the impact on subsequent health
care visits. Psychol Med. 1998;28:417-425.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
7. Plichta SB. Violence and abuse: implications for women's health. In: Falik MK, Collins KS, eds. Women's Health:
The Commonwealth Fund Survey. Baltimore, Md: Johns Hopkins University
Press; 1996:237-272.
8. Coker AL, Smith PH, Bethea L, King MR, McKeown RE. Physical health consequences of physical and psychological intimate
partner violence. Arch Fam Med. 2000;9:451-457.
FREE FULL TEXT
9. McCauley J, Kern DE, Kolodner K, et al. The "battering syndrome": prevalence and clinical characteristics of
domestic violence in primary care internal medicine practices. Ann Intern Med. 1995;123:737-746.
FREE FULL TEXT
10. Diaz-Olavarrieta C, Campbell JC, Garcia de la Cadena C, Paz F, Villa A. Domestic violence against patients with chronic neurologic disorders. Arch Neurol. 1999;56:681-685.
FREE FULL TEXT
11. Toomey TC, Hernandez JT, Gittleman DF, Hulka JF. Relationship of sexual and physical abuse to pain and psychological
adjustment variables in chronic pelvic pain patients. Pain. 1993;53:105-109.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
12. Zachariades N, Koumoura F, Konsolaki-Agouridaki E. Facial trauma in women resulting from violence by men. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1990;48:1250-1253.
ISI
| PUBMED
13. Karol RL, Micka RG, Kuskowski M. Physical, emotional, and sexual abuse among pain patients and health
care providers: implications for psychologists in multidisciplinary pain treatment
centers. Profess Psychol Res Pract. 1992;23:480-485.
FULL TEXT
14. Rapkin AJ, Kames LD, Darke LL, Stampller FM, Naliboff BD. History of physical and sexual abuse in women with chronic pelvic pain. Obstet Gynecol. 1990;76:92-96.
ISI
| PUBMED
15. Cascardi M, Langhinrichsen J, Vivian D. Marital aggression: impact, injury and health correlates of husbands
and wives. Arch Intern Med. 1992;152:1178-1184.
FREE FULL TEXT
16. Drossman DA, Talley NJ, Leserman J, Olden KW, Barreiro MA. Sexual and physical abuse and gastrointestinal illness: review and
recommendations. Ann Intern Med. 1995;123:782-794.
FREE FULL TEXT
17. Kerouac S, Taggart ME, Lescop J, Fortin MF. Dimensions of health in violent families. Health Care Women Int. 1986;7:413-426.
PUBMED
18. Letourneau EJ, Holmes M, Chasendunn-Roark J. Gynecologic health consequences to victims of interpersonal violence. Womens Health Issues. 1999;9:115-120.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
19. Koss MP, Heslet L. Somatic consequences of violence against women. Arch Fam Med. 1992;1:53-59.
FREE FULL TEXT
20. Schei B, Bakketeig LS. Gynaecological impact of sexual and physical abuse by spouse: a study
of a random sample of Norwegian women. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1989;96:1379-1383.
ISI
| PUBMED
21. Schei B. Physically abusive spouse: a risk factor of pelvic inflammatory disease? Scand J Prim Health Care. 1991;9:41-45.
PUBMED
22. Eby KK, Campbell JC, Sullivan CM, Davidson 2nd WS. Health effects of experiences of sexual violence for women with abusive
partners. Health Care Women Int. 1995;16:563-576.
PUBMED
23. Plichta SB, Abraham C. Violence and gynecologic health in women <50 years old. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1996;174:903-907.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
24. Campbell JC, Soeken K. Women's responses to battering over time: analysis of change. J Int Violence. 1999;14:21-40.
25. Campbell JC. Women's responses to sexual abuse in intimate relationships. Health Care Women Int. 1989;10:335-346.
PUBMED
26. Campbell JC, Lewandowski LA. Mental and physical health effects of intimate partner violence on
women and children. Psychiatr Clin North Am. 1997;20:353-374.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
27. Sutherland C, Bybee D, Sullivan C. The long-term effects of battering on women's health. Womens Health. 1998;4:41-70.
PUBMED
28. Soeken KL, McFarlane J, Parker B, Lominack MC. The Abuse Assessment Screen: a clinical instrument to measure frequency,
severity, and perpetrator of abuse against women. In: Jacquelyn Campbell, ed. Empowering Survivors
of Abuse: Health Care for Battered Women and Their Children. Thousand
Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications; 1998:195-203.
29. Campbell JC, Humphreys JC. Nursing Care of Survivors of Family Violence. St Louis, Mo: Mosby–Year Book Inc; 1993.
30. Johnson H, Sacco VF. Researching violence against women: Statistics Canada's national survey. Can J Criminol. 1995;37:281-304.
31. Jones AS, Campbell JC, Schollenberger J, et al. Annual and lifetime prevalence of partner abuse in a sample of female
HMO enrollees. Womens Health Issues. 1999;9:295-305.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
32. McHorney CA, Ware JE Jr, Lu JF, Sherbourne CD. The MOS 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36), III: tests of data
quality, scaling assumptions, and reliability across diverse patient groups. Med Care. 1994;32:40-66.
ISI
| PUBMED
33. Miller CD, Campbell JC. Reliability and Validity of the Miller Abuse Physical
Symptom and Injury Scale (MAPSAIS). Chicago, Ill: Midwest Nursing Research Society; 1993.
34. Kahn H, Sempos C. Statistical Methods in Epidemiology. New York, NY: Oxford University Press Inc; 1989.
35. Silva C, McFarlane J, Soeken K, Parker B, Reel S. Symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder in abused women in a primary
care setting. J Womens Health. 1997;6:543-552.
ISI
| PUBMED
36. Hulme PA. Symptomology and Health Care Utilization of Women
Primary Care Patients Who Experienced Childhood Sexual Abuse [dissertation]. Iowa City: University of Iowa; 1997.
37. McCauley J, Kern DE, Kolodner K, et al. Clinical characteristics of women with a history of childhood abuse:
unhealed wounds. JAMA. 1997;277:1362-1368.
FREE FULL TEXT
38. Holman EA, Silver RC, Waitzkin H. Traumatic life events in primary care patients. Arch Fam Med. 2000;9:802-810.
FREE FULL TEXT
39. Coker AL, Smith PH, McKeown RE, King MJ. Frequency and correlates of intimate partner violence by type: physical,
sexual and psychological battering. Am J Public Health. 2000;90:553-559.
FREE FULL TEXT
40. Schafer J, Caetano R, Clark CL. Rates of intimate partner violence in the United States. Am J Public Health. 1998;88:1702-1704.
FREE FULL TEXT
41. Campbell JC, Alford P. The dark consequences of marital rape. Am J Nurs. 1989;89:946-949.
ISI
| PUBMED
42. Champion JD, Shain RN. The context of sexually transmitted disease: life histories of woman
abuse. Issues Ment Health Nurs. 1998;19:463-479.
FULL TEXT
| PUBMED
43. Davilla YR, Brackley MH. Mexican and Mexican American women in battered women's shelter: barriers
to condom negotiation for HIV/AIDS prevention. Issues Ment Health Nurs. 1999;20:333-355.
FULL TEXT
| PUBMED
44. Family Violence Prevention Fund. Preventing Domestic Violence: Clinical Guidelines
on Routine Screening. San Francisco, Calif: Family Violence Prevention Fund; 1999.
45. Parsons LH, Goodwin MM, Petersen R. Violence against women and reproductive health: toward defining a role
for reproductive health care services. Matern Child Health J. 2001;4:135-140.
46. Warshaw C, Ganley AL, Salber PR. Improving the Health Care Response to Domestic Violence:
A Resource Manual for Health Care Providers (Newly Revised). San Francisco, Calif: Family Violence Prevention Fund; 1998.
47. Gielen AC, O'Campo PJ, Campbell JC, et al. Women's opinions about domestic violence screening and mandatory reporting. Am J Prev Med. 2000;19:279-285.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
 CiteULike  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati
What's this?
RELATED ARTICLE
Archives of Internal Medicine Reader's Choice: Continuing Medical Education
Arch Intern Med. 2002;162(10):1199-1200.
FULL TEXT
THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES
|
A Melding of the Minds: When Primatology Meets Personality and Social Psychology
Brosnan et al.
Pers Soc Psychol Rev 2009;13:129-147.
ABSTRACT
Intimate partner violence against women, health effects and health care seeking in rural Vietnam
Vung et al.
Eur J Public Health 2009;19:178-182.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Intimate Partner Homicide: Relationships to Alcohol and Firearms
Roberts
Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice 2009;25:67-88.
ABSTRACT
Prevalence, Types, and Pattern of Intimate Partner Violence Among Pregnant Women in Lima, Peru
Perales et al.
Violence Against Women 2009;15:224-250.
ABSTRACT
Intersections of Harm and Health: A Qualitative Study of Intimate Partner Violence in Women's Lives
Thomas et al.
Violence Against Women 2008;14:1252-1273.
ABSTRACT
Female Perpetration of Violence in Heterosexual Intimate Relationships: Adolescence Through Adulthood
Williams et al.
Trauma Violence Abuse 2008;9:227-249.
ABSTRACT
Does Health Care Provider Screening for Domestic Violence Vary by Race and Income?
Weeks et al.
Violence Against Women 2008;14:844-855.
ABSTRACT
Evaluation of Universal Screening for Military-Related Sexual Trauma
Kimerling et al.
Psychiatr. Serv. 2008;59:635-640.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Providing Support to IPV Victims in the Emergency Department: Vignette-Based Interviews With IPV Survivors and Emergency Department Nurses
Watt et al.
Violence Against Women 2008;14:715-726.
ABSTRACT
Spousal sexual violence and poverty are risk factors for sexually transmitted infections in women: a longitudinal study of women in Goa, India
Weiss et al.
Sex. Transm. Infect. 2008;84:133-139.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Heterogeneity Among Violence-Exposed Women: Applying Person-Oriented Research Methods
Nurius and Macy
J Interpers Violence 2008;23:389-415.
ABSTRACT
The Health of Trafficked Women: A Survey of Women Entering Posttrafficking Services in Europe
Zimmerman et al.
Am. J. Public Health 2008;98:55-59.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Physical health consequences of intimate partner violence in Spanish women
Ruiz-Perez et al.
Eur J Public Health 2007;17:437-443.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Continued Smoking and Smoking Cessation Among Urban Young Adult Women: Findings From the Reach for Health Longitudinal Study
Stueve and O'Donnell
Am. J. Public Health 2007;97:1408-1411.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Relationship of Abuse History to Functional Gastrointestinal Disorders and Symptoms: Some Possible Mediating Mechanisms
Leserman and Drossman
Trauma Violence Abuse 2007;8:331-343.
ABSTRACT
An Overview of Intimate Partner Violence Among Latinos
Klevens
Violence Against Women 2007;13:111-122.
ABSTRACT
Intimate Partner Violence in Older Women
Bonomi et al.
Gerontologist 2007;47:34-41.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Examining the effect of residential change on intimate partner violence risk.
Waltermaurer et al.
J. Epidemiol. Community Health 2006;60:923-927.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Beyond the shadows: domestic spousal violence in a "democratizing" egypt.
Ammar
Trauma Violence Abuse 2006;7:244-259.
ABSTRACT
Perpetration of Intimate Partner Violence Associated With Sexual Risk Behaviors Among Young Adult Men
Raj et al.
Am. J. Public Health 2006;96:1873-1878.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Women's Response to Intimate Partner Violence
Ruiz-Perez et al.
J Interpers Violence 2006;21:1156-1168.
ABSTRACT
History of Domestic Violence and Physical Health in Midlife
Loxton et al.
Violence Against Women 2006;12:715-731.
ABSTRACT
Interpersonal Violence in the Lives of Urban American Indian and Alaska Native Women: Implications for Health, Mental Health, and Help-Seeking
Evans-Campbell et al.
Am. J. Public Health 2006;96:1416-1422.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Are Temporary Restraining Orders More Likely to Be Issued When Applications Mention Firearms?
Vittes and Sorenson
Eval Rev 2006;30:266-282.
ABSTRACT
A predictive model to identify women with injuries related to intimate partner violence
Halpern and Dodson
Journal of the American Dental Association 2006;137:604-609.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
The Extent and Frequency of Abuse in the Lives of Older Women and Their Relationship With Health Outcomes
Fisher and Regan
Gerontologist 2006;46:200-209.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Women Exposed to Intimate Partner Violence: Expectations and Experiences When They Encounter Health Care Professionals: A Meta-analysis of Qualitative Studies
Feder et al.
Arch Intern Med 2006;166:22-37.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Violence against women: A global public health crisis
Ellsberg
Scand J Public Health 2006;34:1-4.
Mutable Influences on Intimate Partner Abuse Screening in Health Care Settings: A Synthesis of the Literature
Stayton and Duncan
Trauma Violence Abuse 2005;6:271-285.
ABSTRACT
Intimate Partner Violence, Employment,and The Workplace: Consequences and Future Directions
Swanberg et al.
Trauma Violence Abuse 2005;6:286-312.
ABSTRACT
Intimate Partner Violence and Mental Health Consequences in Women Attending Family Practice in Spain
Ruiz-Perez and Plazaola-Castano
Psychosom. Med. 2005;67:791-797.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Survivor Preferences for Response to IPV Disclosure
Dienemann et al.
Clin Nurs Res 2005;14:215-233.
ABSTRACT
Is Intimate Partner Violence Associated with Unintended Pregnancy? A Review of the Literature
Pallitto et al.
Trauma Violence Abuse 2005;6:217-235.
ABSTRACT
Prevalence of and Risk Factors for Intimate Partner Violence in China
Xu et al.
Am. J. Public Health 2005;95:78-85.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Intimate Partner Violence and Physical Health Consequences: Policy and Practice Implications
Plichta
J Interpers Violence 2004;19:1296-1323.
ABSTRACT
Intimate Male Partner Violence Impairs Immune Control Over Herpes Simplex Virus Type 1 in Physically and Psychologically Abused Women
Garcia-Linares et al.
Psychosom. Med. 2004;66:965-972.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Medical Management of Intimate Partner Violence Considering the Stages of Change: Precontemplation and Contemplation
Zink et al.
Ann Fam Med 2004;2:231-239.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
An Integrative Review of Separation in the Context of Victimization: Consequences and Implications for Women
Walker et al.
Trauma Violence Abuse 2004;5:143-193.
ABSTRACT
Guest Editors' Introduction: Overlooked Issues During the Golden Years: Domestic Voilence and Intimate Patner Voilence Against Older Women
Fisher et al.
Violence Against Women 2003;9:1409-1416.
Intimate Partner Violence and Abuse among Active Duty Military Women
Campbell et al.
Violence Against Women 2003;9:1072-1092.
ABSTRACT
Interventions for Violence Against Women: Scientific Review
Wathen and MacMillan
JAMA 2003;289:589-600.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
|
