No Quick Fixes: A Mixed Methods Feasibility Study of an Urban Community Health Worker Outreach Program for Intimate Partner Violence

In their own words: Perspectives of IPV survivors on obtaining support within the healthcare system

BACKGROUND

Almost half of all women in the US experience intimate partner violence (IPV) in their lifetime. The US Preventive Services Task Force recommends IPV screening paired with intervention for women of reproductive age. We aim to understand clinical practices and policies that are beneficial, detrimental, or insufficient to support survivors of IPV in a safety-net healthcare system.

METHODS

We sampled 45 women who were 18-64 years old, had experienced IPV within the prior year and were patients in the San Francisco Health Network. We conducted in-depth, semi-structured interviews to elicit their perspectives on disclosing IPV and obtaining support within the healthcare system. We analyzed our data using thematic analysis and grounded theory practices informed by ecological systems theory.

FINDINGS

We identified four themes regarding factors that impeded or facilitated discussing and addressing IPV across interpersonal and systemic levels relating to relationship-building, respect, autonomy and resources. (1) Interpersonal barriers included insufficient attention to relationship-building, lack of respect or concern for survivor circumstances, and feeling pressured to disclose IPV or to comply with clinicians' recommended interventions. (2) Interpersonal facilitators consisted of patient-centered IPV inquiry, attentive listening, strength-based counseling and transparency regarding confidentiality. (3) Systemic barriers such as visit time limitations, clinician turn-over and feared loss of autonomy from involvement of governmental systems leading to separation from children or harm to partners, negatively affected interpersonal dynamics. (4) Systemic facilitators involved provision of resources through IPV universal education, on-site access to IPV services, and community partnerships.

CONCLUSIONS

Women experiencing IPV in our study reported that relationship-building, respect, autonomy, and IPV-related resources were essential components to providing support, promoting safety, and enabling healing in the healthcare setting. Successful trauma-informed transformation of healthcare systems must optimize interpersonal and systemic factors that improve survivor wellbeing while eliminating barriers.

Co-designing an Outreach Intervention for Women Experiencing Street-Involvement and Gender-Based Violence: Community-Academic Partnerships in Action

Outreach is an important approach to improve health and social care for women experiencing street involvement (SI) or gender-based violence (GBV). Few studies have examined outreach approaches that incorporate SI and GBV. Drawing on feminist theories and principles of community-based research, we detail an inclusive co-design approach for an outreach intervention considering these interrelated contexts. Women with lived experience, researchers, and service leaders drew on research and experiential knowledge to define outreach engagement principles: tackling GBV, personhood and relational engagement, trauma-informed engagement, and harm reduction engagement. The resulting intervention integrates these principles to enable building and sustaining relationships to facilitate care.

Breaking the silence on gendered harassment and assault of community health workers: an analysis of ethnographic studies

INTRODUCTION

Across a variety of settings, women in tenuous financial circumstances are drawn to community health work as a way to advance themselves in the context of limited employment options. Female Community Health Workers (CHWs) are often preferred because they can more easily access mothers and children; at the same time, gender norms are at the heart of many of the challenges and inequities that these workers encounter. Here, we explore how these gender roles and a lack of formal worker protections leave CHWs vulnerable to violence and sexual harassment, common occurrences that are frequently downplayed or silenced.

METHODS

We are a group of researchers who work on CHW programmes in a variety of contexts globally. The examples here are drawn from our ethnographic research (participant observation and in-depth interviews).

RESULTS

CHW work creates job opportunities for women in contexts where such opportunities are extremely rare. These jobs can be a lifeline for women with few other options. Yet the threat of violence can be very real: women may face violence from the community, and some experience harassment from supervisors within health programmes.

CONCLUSION

Taking gendered harassment and violence seriously in CHW programmes is critical for research and practice. Fulfilling CHWs' vision of health programmes that value them, support them and give them opportunities may be a way for CHW programmes to lead the way in gender-transformative labour practices.

What is the volume, diversity and nature of recent, robust evidence for the use of peer support in health and social care? An evidence and gap map

Background

Peer support interventions involve people drawing on shared personal experience to help one another improve their physical or mental health, or reduce social isolation. If effective, they may also lessen the demand on health and social care services, reducing costs. However, the design and delivery of peer support varies greatly, from the targeted problem or need, the setting and mode of delivery, to the number and content of sessions. Robust evidence is essential for policymakers commissioning peer support and practitioners delivering services in health care and community settings. This map draws together evidence on different types of peer support to support the design and delivery of interventions.

Objectives

The aim of this map was to provide an overview of the volume, diversity and nature of recent, high quality evidence on the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the use of peer support in health and social care.

Search Methods

We searched MEDLINE, seven further bibliographic databases, and Epistemonikos for systematic reviews (in October 2020), randomised controlled trials (in March 2021) and economic evaluations (in May 2021) on the effectiveness of peer support interventions in health and social care. We also conducted searches of Google Scholar, two trial registers, PROSPERO, and completed citation chasing on included studies.

Selection Criteria

Systematic reviews, randomised controlled trials and economic evaluations were included in the map. Included studies focused on adult populations with a defined health or social care need, were conducted in high-income countries, and published since 2015. Any measure of effectiveness was included, as was any form of peer support providing the peer had shared experience with the participant and a formalised role.

Data Collection and Analysis

Data were extracted on the type of peer support intervention and outcomes assessed in included studies. Standardised tools were used to assess study quality for all studies: assessing the methodological quality of systematic reviews 2 for systematic reviews; Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomised controlled trials; and consensus health economic criteria list for economic evaluations.

Main Results

We included 91 studies: 32 systematic reviews; 52 randomised controlled trials; and 7 economic evaluations. Whilst most included systematic reviews and economic evaluations were assessed to be of low or medium quality, the majority of randomised controlled trials were of higher quality. There were concentrations of evidence relating to different types of peer support, including education, psychological support, self-care/self-management and social support. Populations with long-term health conditions were most commonly studied. The majority of studies measured health-related indicators as outcomes; few studies assessed cost-effectiveness. Studies were unevenly distributed geographically, with most being conducted in the USA. Several gaps were evident regarding the delivery of peer support, particularly the integration of peers and professionals in delivering support and interventions of longer duration.

Authors' Conclusions

Although there is evidence available to inform the commissioning and delivery of peer support in health and social care, there are also clear gaps that need to be addressed to further support provision, particularly regarding cost-effectiveness. The effectiveness of peer support in different countries, with varying health and social care systems, is a priority for future research, as is the integration of peers with professionals in delivering peer support.

Community Health Worker Knowledge, Attitudes, Practices and Readiness to Manage Intimate Partner Violence

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is an important public health concern with higher prevalence among women. Community health workers (CHWs) are trusted frontline public health workers that bridge gaps between communities and healthcare services. Despite their effectiveness in delivering services and improving outcomes for different chronic conditions, there is a dearth of understanding regarding CHW management of IPV. The purpose of this study is to examine knowledge, attitudes, practices, and readiness to manage IPV among a sample of CHWs (n = 152). Participants completed an online version of the Physician Readiness to Manage Intimate Partner Violence Survey (PREMIS), which was modified for CHW practice. Psychometrics of the newly adapted tool, along with empirical relationships between knowledge, attitudes, and readiness to manage IPV were examined. Most sub-scales yielded moderate to high reliability (0.70 < α's < 0.97), some sub-scales had low reliability (0.57 < α's < 0.64), and construct validity was established for several of the subscales. On average, many CHWs had low scores on objective knowledge of IPV (mean = 15.4 out of 26), perceived preparation to manage IPV (mean = 3.8 out of 7), and perceived knowledge of IPV (mean = 3.7 out of 7). About 56% of CHWs indicated having no previous IPV training, 34% did not screen for IPV, and 65% were in the contemplation stage of behavior change. Multiple regression models indicated that knowledge, staff capabilities and staff preparation were significant predictors of perceived preparedness to manage IPV (all p's < 0.05). Results can inform future credentialing requirements and training programs for CHWs to better assist their clients who are victims of IPV.

A realist review of which advocacy interventions work for which abused women under what circumstances

BACKGROUND

Intimate partner abuse (including coercive control, physical, sexual, economic, emotional and economic abuse) is common worldwide. Advocacy may help women who are in, or have left, an abusive intimate relationship, to stop or reduce repeat victimisation and overcome consequences of the abuse. Advocacy primarily involves education, safety planning support and increasing access to different services. It may be stand-alone or part of other services and interventions, and may be provided within healthcare, criminal justice, social, government or specialist domestic violence services. We focus on the abuse of women, as interventions for abused men require different considerations.

OBJECTIVES

To assess advocacy interventions for intimate partner abuse in women, in terms of which interventions work for whom, why and in what circumstances.

SEARCH METHODS

In January 2019 we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, 12 other databases, two trials registers and two relevant websites. The search had three phases: scoping of articles to identify candidate theories; iterative recursive search for studies to explore and fill gaps in these theories; and systematic search for studies to test, confirm or refute our explanatory theory.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Empirical studies of any advocacy or multi-component intervention including advocacy, intended for women aged 15 years and over who were experiencing or had experienced any form of intimate partner abuse, or of advocates delivering such interventions, or experiences of women who were receiving or had received such an intervention. Partner abuse encompasses coercive control in the absence of physical abuse. For theory development, we included studies that did not strictly fit our original criteria but provided information useful for theory development.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Four review authors independently extracted data, with double assessment of 10% of the data, and assessed risk of bias and quality of the evidence. We adopted RAMESES (Realist and meta-narrative evidence syntheses: evolving standards) standards for reporting results. We applied a realist approach to the analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 98 studies (147 articles). There were 88 core studies: 37 focused on advocates (4 survey-based, 3 instrument development, 30 qualitative focus) and seven on abused women (6 qualitative studies, 1 survey); 44 were experimental intervention studies (some including qualitative evaluations). Ten further studies (3 randomised controlled trials (RCTs), 1 intervention process evaluation, 1 qualitative study, 2 mixed methods studies, 2 surveys of women, and 1 mixed methods study of women and staff) did not fit the original criteria but added useful information, as befitting a realist approach. Two studies are awaiting classification and three are ongoing.Advocacy interventions varied considerably in contact hours, profession delivering and setting.We constructed a conceptual model from six essential principles based on context-mechanism-outcome (CMO) patterns.We have moderate and high confidence in evidence for the importance of considering both women's vulnerabilities and intersectionalities and the trade-offs of abuse-related decisions in the contexts of individual women's lives. Decisions should consider the risks to the woman's safety from the abuse. Whether actions resulting from advocacy increase or decrease abuse depends on contextual factors (e.g. severity and type of abuse), and the outcomes the particular advocacy intervention is designed to address (e.g. increasing successful court orders versus decreasing depression).We have low confidence in evidence regarding the significance of physical dependencies, being pregnant or having children. There were links between setting (high confidence), and potentially also theoretical underpinnings of interventions, type, duration and intensity of advocacy, advocate discipline and outcomes (moderate and low confidence). A good therapeutic alliance was important (high confidence); this alliance might be improved when advocates are matched with abused women on ethnicity or abuse experience, exercise cultural humility, and remove structural barriers to resource access by marginalised women. We identified significant challenges for advocates in inter-organisational working, vicarious traumatisation, and lack of clarity on how much support to give a woman (moderate and high confidence). To work effectively, advocates need ongoing training, role clarity, access to resources, and peer and institutional support.Our provisional model highlights the complex way that factors combine and interact for effective advocacy. We confirmed the core ingredients of advocacy according to both women and advocates, supported by studies and theoretical considerations: education and information on abuse; rights and resources; active referral and liaising with other services; risk assessment and safety planning. We were unable to confirm the impact of complexity of the intervention (low confidence). Our low confidence in the evidence was driven mostly by a lack of relevant studies, rather than poor-quality studies, despite the size of the review.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Results confirm the core ingredients of advocacy and suggest its use rests on sound theoretical underpinnings. We determined the elements of a good therapeutic alliance and how it might be improved, with a need for particular considerations of the factors affecting marginalised women. Women's goals from advocacy should be considered in the contexts of their personal lives. Women's safety was not necessarily at greatest risk from staying with the abuser. Potentially, if undertaken for long enough, advocacy should benefit an abused woman in terms of at least one outcome providing the goals are matched to each woman's needs. Some outcomes may take months to be determined. Where abuse is severe, some interventions may increase abuse. Advocates have a challenging role and must be supported emotionally, through provision of resources and through professional training, by organisations and peers.Future research should consider the different principles identified in this review, and study outcomes should be considered in relation to the mechanisms and contexts elucidated. More longitudinal evidence is needed. Single-subject research designs may help determine exactly when effect no longer increases, to determine the duration of longitudinal work, which will likely differ for vulnerable and marginalised women. Further work is needed to ascertain how to tailor advocacy interventions to cultural variations and rural and resource-poor settings. The methods used in the included studies may, in some cases, limit the applicability and completeness of the data reported. Economic analyses are required to ascertain if resources devoted to advocacy interventions are cost-effective in healthcare and community settings.