AJPH
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


AJPH First Look, published online ahead of print May 30, 2007
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
AJPH.2005.085357v1
97/7/1319    most recent
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Coker, A. L.
Right arrow Articles by Williams, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Coker, A. L.
Right arrow Articles by Williams, M.
©
American Journal of Public Health, 10.2105/AJPH.2005.085357


Research and Practice

Partner Violence Screening in Rural Health Care Clinics

Ann L. Coker 1*, Vicki C. Flerx 2, Paige H. Smith 3, Daniel J. Whitaker 4, Mary Kay Fadden 5, Melinda Williams 4

1 University of Texas School of Public Health
2 Univeristy of South Carolina
3 University of North Carolina at Greensboro
4 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
5 University of Texas-Houston School of Public Health at Brownsville

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: ann.l.coker{at}uth.tmc.edu.


   Abstract

Objective. We sought to determine the frequency of intimate partner violence by type in a large, clinic-based, nurse-administered screening and services intervention project.

Methods. A brief intimate partner violence screen, which included items to measure sexual and physical assaults and psychological battering (using the Women’s Experience With Battering scale) was administered to consenting women receiving care at 1 of 8 rural clinics in South Carolina.

Results. Between April 2002 and August 2005, 4945 eligible women were offered intimate partner violence screening, to which 3664 (74.1%) consented. Prevalence of intimate partner violence in a current (ongoing) relationship was 13.3%, and 939 women (25.6%) had experienced intimate partner violence at some point in the past 5 years. Of those ever experiencing intimate partner violence, the majority (65.6%) experienced both assaults and psychological battering; 10.1% experienced assault only, and 24.3% experienced psychological battering only. Most women (85.5%) currently experiencing both psychological battering and assaults stated that violence was a problem in their current relationship.

Conclusions. The intimate partner violence screening technique we used was feasible to implement, acceptable to women seeking health care at the targeted clinics, and indicated a high proportion of women reporting intimate partner violence in the past 5 years, with a majority of those women stating that such violence was a problem in their relationships. These findings demonstrated the viability of the screening technique, which supports the growing importance of implementing intimate partner violence screenings in clinical settings in order to reduce the prevalence of violence in intimate relationships.

Key Words: Epidemiology, Injury/Emergency Care/Violence, Rural Health, Screening, Women's Health







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
Copyright © 2007 by the American Public Health Association