Associations between Intimate Partner Violence and Health among Men Who Have Sex with Men: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Background:
Intimate partner violence (IPV) among men who have sex with men (MSM) is a significant problem. Little is known about the association between IPV and health for MSM. We aimed to estimate the association between experience and perpetration of IPV, and various health conditions and sexual risk behaviours among MSM.
Methods and Findings:
We searched 13 electronic databases up to 23 October 2013 to identify research studies reporting the odds of health conditions or sexual risk behaviours for MSM experiencing or perpetrating IPV. Nineteen studies with 13,797 participants were included in the review. Random effects meta-analyses were performed to estimate pooled odds ratios (ORs). Exposure to IPV as a victim was associated with increased odds of substance use (OR = 1.88, 95% CIOR 1.59–2.22, I2 = 46.9%, 95% CII2 0%–78%), being HIV positive (OR = 1.46, 95% CIOR 1.26–1.69, I2 = 0.0%, 95% CII2 0%–62%), reporting depressive symptoms (OR = 1.52, 95% CIOR 1.24–1.86, I2 = 9.9%, 95% CII2 0%–91%), and engagement in unprotected anal sex (OR = 1.72, 95% CIOR 1.44–2.05, I2 = 0.0%, 95% CII2 0%–68%). Perpetration of IPV was associated with increased odds of substance use (OR = 1.99, 95% CIOR 1.33–2.99, I2 = 73.1%). These results should be interpreted with caution because of methodological weaknesses such as the lack of validated tools to measure IPV in this population and the diversity of recall periods and key outcomes in the identified studies.
Conclusions:
MSM who are victims of IPV are more likely to engage in substance use, suffer from depressive symptoms, be HIV positive, and engage in unprotected anal sex. MSM who perpetrate IPV are more likely to engage in substance use. Our results highlight the need for research into effective interventions to prevent IPV in MSM, as well as the importance of providing health care professionals with training in how to address issues of IPV among MSM and the need to raise awareness of local and national support services.
Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary
Vyšlo v časopise:
Associations between Intimate Partner Violence and Health among Men Who Have Sex with Men: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. PLoS Med 11(3): e32767. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1001609
Kategorie:
Research Article
prolekare.web.journal.doi_sk:
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001609
Souhrn
Background:
Intimate partner violence (IPV) among men who have sex with men (MSM) is a significant problem. Little is known about the association between IPV and health for MSM. We aimed to estimate the association between experience and perpetration of IPV, and various health conditions and sexual risk behaviours among MSM.
Methods and Findings:
We searched 13 electronic databases up to 23 October 2013 to identify research studies reporting the odds of health conditions or sexual risk behaviours for MSM experiencing or perpetrating IPV. Nineteen studies with 13,797 participants were included in the review. Random effects meta-analyses were performed to estimate pooled odds ratios (ORs). Exposure to IPV as a victim was associated with increased odds of substance use (OR = 1.88, 95% CIOR 1.59–2.22, I2 = 46.9%, 95% CII2 0%–78%), being HIV positive (OR = 1.46, 95% CIOR 1.26–1.69, I2 = 0.0%, 95% CII2 0%–62%), reporting depressive symptoms (OR = 1.52, 95% CIOR 1.24–1.86, I2 = 9.9%, 95% CII2 0%–91%), and engagement in unprotected anal sex (OR = 1.72, 95% CIOR 1.44–2.05, I2 = 0.0%, 95% CII2 0%–68%). Perpetration of IPV was associated with increased odds of substance use (OR = 1.99, 95% CIOR 1.33–2.99, I2 = 73.1%). These results should be interpreted with caution because of methodological weaknesses such as the lack of validated tools to measure IPV in this population and the diversity of recall periods and key outcomes in the identified studies.
Conclusions:
MSM who are victims of IPV are more likely to engage in substance use, suffer from depressive symptoms, be HIV positive, and engage in unprotected anal sex. MSM who perpetrate IPV are more likely to engage in substance use. Our results highlight the need for research into effective interventions to prevent IPV in MSM, as well as the importance of providing health care professionals with training in how to address issues of IPV among MSM and the need to raise awareness of local and national support services.
Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary
Zdroje
1. Garcia-MorenoC, JansenHAFM, EllsbergM, HeiseL, WattsCH (2006) Prevalence of intimate partner violence: findings from the who multi-country study on women's health and domestic violence. Lancet 368: 1260–1269.
2. Walters M, Chen J, Breiding M (2013) The National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey (NISVS): 2010 findings on victimization by sexual orientation. Atlanta (Georgia): US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention National Center for Injury Prevention and Control.
3. DevriesKM, MakJYT, García-MorenoC, PetzoldM, ChildJC, et al. (2013) The global prevalence of intimate partner violence against women. Science 340: 1527–1528.
4. EllsbergM, JansenHAFM, HeiseL, WattsCH, Garcia-MorenoC (2008) Intimate partner violence and women's physical and mental health in the who multi-country study on women's health and domestic violence: an observational study. Lancet 371: 1165–1172.
5. TrevillionK, OramS, FederG, HowardLM (2012) Experiences of domestic violence and mental disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS ONE 7: e51740.
6. SharpsPW, LaughonK, GiangrandeSK (2007) Intimate partner violence and the childbearing year: maternal and infant health consequences. Trauma Violence Abuse 8: 105–116.
7. CokerAL (2007) Does physical intimate partner violence affect sexual health? A systematic review. Trauma Violence Abuse 8: 149–177.
8. AlexanderCJ (2002) Violence in gay and lesbian relationships. J Gay Lesbian Soc Serv 14: 95–98.
9. Henderson L (2003) Prevalence of domestic violence among lesbians and gay men. London: Sigma Research.
10. MakWW, ChongES, KwongMM (2010) Prevalence of same-sex intimate partner violence in Hong Kong. Public Health 124: 149–152.
11. NowinskiSN, BowenE (2012) Partner violence against heterosexual and gay men: prevalence and correlates. Aggress Violent Behav 17: 36–52.
12. OwenSS, BurkeTW (2004) An exploration of prevalence of domestic violence in same-sex relationships. Psychol Rep 95: 129–132.
13. BarrettBJ, St. PierreM (2013) Intimate partner violence reported by lesbian-, gay-, and bisexual-identified individuals living in Canada: an exploration of within-group variations. J Gay Lesbian Soc Serv 25: 1–23.
14. ChongESK, MakWWS, KwongMMF (2013) Risk and protective factors of same-sex intimate partner violence in Hong Kong. J Interpers Violence 28: 1476–1497.
15. StanleyJL, BartholomewK, TaylorT, OramD, LandoltM (2006) Intimate violence in male same-sex relationships. J Fam Violence 21: 31–42.
16. MerrillGS, WolfeVA (2000) Battered gay men: an exploration of abuse, help seeking, and why they stay. J Homosex 39: 1–30.
17. FinneranC, StephensonR (2013) Intimate partner violence among men who have sex with men. A systematic review. Trauma Violence Abuse 14: 168–185.
18. GoldbergNG, MeyerIH (2013) Sexual orientation disparities in history of intimate partner violence: results from the California Health Interview Survey. J Interpers Violence 28: 1109–1118.
19. StephensonR, FinneranC (2013) The IPV-GBM scale: a new scale to measure intimate partner violence among gay and bisexual men. PLoS ONE 8: e62592.
20. RandleAA, GrahamCA (2011) A review of the evidence on the effects of intimate partner violence on men. Psychol Men Masc 12: 97–111.
21. Robinson A, Rowland J (2007) What do men want? Safe Domestic Abuse Q 22: 4–76. London: Women's Aid.
22. MoherD, LiberatiA, TetzlaffJ, AltmanDG, ThePG (2009) Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA Statement. PLoS Med 6: e1000097.
23. StroupDF, BerlinJA, MortonSC, OlkinI, WilliamsonGD, et al. (2000) Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: A proposal for reporting. JAMA 283: 2008–2012.
24. ZhangL, QianH-z, BlevinsML, YinL, RuanY, et al. (2011) Internet-based behavioral interventions for preventing HIV infection in men who have sex with men (MSM). Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2011: CD009525 doi:10.1002/14651858.CD009525
25. RamsayJ, CarterY, DavidsonL, DunneD, EldridgeS, et al. (2009) Advocacy interventions to reduce or eliminate violence and promote the physical and psychosocial well-being of women who experience intimate partner abuse. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2009: CD005043 doi:10.1002/14651858.CD005043.pub2
26. JohnsonWD, DiazRM, FlandersWD, GoodmanM, HillAN, et al. (2008) Behavioral interventions to reduce risk for sexual transmission of HIV among men who have sex with men. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2008: CD001230 doi:10.1002/14651858.CD001230.pub2
27. CoulthardP, YongSL, AdamsonL, WarburtonA, WorthingtonHV, et al. (2010) Domestic violence screening and intervention programmes for adults with dental or facial injury. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010: CD004486 doi:10.1002/14651858.CD004486.pub3
28. RelfMV (2001) Battering and HIV in men who have sex with men: a critique and synthesis of the literature. J Assoc Nurses AIDS Care 12: 41–48.
29. MurrayCE, MobleyAJ, BufordAP, Seaman-DeJohnMM (2006) Same-sex intimate partner violence: dynamics, social context, and counseling implications. J LGBT Issues Couns 1: 7–30.
30. McClennenJC (2005) Domestic violence between same-gender partners: recent findings and future research. J Interpers Violence 20: 149–154.
31. DownsSH, BlackN (1998) The feasibility of creating a checklist for the assessment of the methodological quality both of randomised and non-randomised studies of health care interventions. J Epidemiol Community Health 52: 377–384.
32. von ElmE, AltmanDG, EggerM, PocockSJ, GøtzschePC, et al. (2007) The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Lancet 370: 1453–1457.
33. StataCorp (2011) Stata statistical software: release 12 version [computer program]. College Station (Texas): StataCorp.
34. Alderson P, Green S, Higgins J (2004) Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions, version 4.2.2 (updated March 2004). Oxford: Cochrane Collaboration.
35. FeldmanMB, DiazRM, ReamGL, El-BasselN (2007) Intimate partner violence and HIV sexual risk behavior among Latino gay and bisexual men. J LGBT Health Res 3: 9–19.
36. ZhangJ, KaiFY (1998) What's the relative risk? JAMA 280: 1690–1691.
37. HigginsJ, ThompsonSG (2002) Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Stat Med 21: 1539–1558.
38. Nicola O, Matteo B, Julian H, Iain B (2005) Heterogi: Stata module to quantify heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. S449201. Boston: Boston College Department of Economics.
39. FazelS, GulatiG, LinsellL, GeddesJR, GrannM (2009) Schizophrenia and violence: systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS Med 6: e1000120.
40. ChengY-J, LiuZ-H, YaoF-J, ZengW-T, ZhengD-D, et al. (2013) Current and former smoking and risk for venous thromboembolism: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS Med 10: e1001515.
41. PalmerTM, PetersJL, SuttonAJ, MorenoSG (2008) Contour-enhanced funnel plots for meta-analysis. Stata J 8: 242–254.
42. BartholomewK, ReganKV, OramD, WhiteMA (2008) Correlates of partner abuse in male same-sex relationships. Violence Vict 23: 344–360.
43. StephensonR, de VouxA, SullivanPS (2011) Intimate partner violence and sexual risk-taking among men who have sex with men in south africa. West J Emerg Med 12: 343–347.
44. DunkleKL, WongFY, NehlEJ, LinL, HeN, et al. (2013) Male-on-male intimate partner violence and sexual risk behaviors among money boys and other men who have sex with men in shanghai, china. Sex Transm Dis 40: 362–365.
45. MustanskiB, NewcombME, ClerkinEM (2011) Relationship characteristics and sexual risk-taking in young men who have sex with men. Health Psychol 30: 597–605.
46. DyerTP, ShoptawS, GuadamuzTE, PlankeyM, KaoU, et al. (2012) Application of syndemic theory to black men who have sex with men in the Multicenter AIDS Cohort Study. J Urban Health 89: 697–708.
47. GreenwoodGL, RelfMV, HuangB, PollackLM, CancholaJA, et al. (2002) Battering victimization among a probability-based sample of men who have sex with men. Am J Public Health 92: 1964–1969.
48. HughesT, McCabeSE, WilsnackSC, WestBT, BoydCJ (2010) Victimization and substance use disorders in a national sample of heterosexual and sexual minority women and men. Addiction 105: 2130–2140.
49. KellyBC, IzienickiH, BimbiDS, ParsonsJT (2011) The intersection of mutual partner violence and substance use among urban gays, lesbians, and bisexuals. Deviant Behav 32: 379–404.
50. KoblinBA, TorianL, XuG, GuilinV, MakkiH, et al. (2006) Violence and HIV-related risk among young men who have sex with men. AIDS Care 18: 961–967.
51. StallR, MillsTC, WilliamsonJ, HartT, GreenwoodG, et al. (2003) Association of co-occurring psychosocial health problems and increased vulnerability to HIV/AIDS among urban men who have sex with men. Am J Public Health 93: 939–942.
52. StephensonR, KhosropourC, SullivanP (2010) Reporting of intimate partner violence among men who have sex with men in an online survey. West J Emerg Med 11: 242–246.
53. WongCF, WeissG, AyalaG, KipkeMD (2010) Harassment, discrimination, violence, and illicit drug use among young men who have sex with men. AIDS Educ Prev 22: 286–298.
54. HoustonE, McKirnanDJ (2007) Intimate partner abuse among gay and bisexual men: risk correlates and health outcomes. J Urban Health 84: 681–690.
55. MustanskiB, GarofaloR, HerrickA, DonenbergG (2007) Psychosocial health problems increase risk for HIV among urban young men who have sex with men: preliminary evidence of a syndemic in need of attention. Ann Behav Med 34: 37–45.
56. Nieves-RosaLE, Carballo-DieguezA, DolezalC (2000) Domestic abuse and HIV-risk behavior in Latin American men who have sex with men in New York City. J Gay Lesbian Soc Serv 11: 77–90.
57. LiY, BakerJJ, KorostyshevskiyVR, SlackRS, PlankeyMW (2012) The association of intimate partner violence, recreational drug use with HIV seroprevalence among msm. AIDS Behav 16: 491–498.
58. StephensonR, RentschC, SalazarLF, SullivanPS (2011b) Dyadic characteristics and intimate partner violence among men who have sex with men. West J Emerg Med 12: 324–332.
59. SmithPH, EarpJA, DeVellisR (1994) Measuring battering: development of the Women's Experience with Battering (WEB) Scale. Womens Health 1: 273–288.
60. WellesSL, CorbinTJ, RichJA, ReedE, RajA (2011) Intimate partner violence among men having sex with men, women, or both: early-life sexual and physical abuse as antecedents. J Community Health 36: 477–485.
61. HayashinoY, NoguchiY, FukuiT (2005) Systematic evaluation and comparison of statistical tests for publication bias. J Epidemiol 15: 235–243.
62. Glasziou P, Irwig L, Bain C, Colditz G (2001) Systematic reviews in health care: a practical guide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
63. ValentineSE, PantaloneDW (2013) Correlates of perceptual and behavioral definitions of abuse in HIV-positive sexual minority men. Psychol Trauma 5: 417–425.
64. UK Department of Health (2013) A framework for sexual health improvement in England. Available: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/142592/9287-2900714-TSO-SexualHealthPolicyNW_ACCESSIBLE.pdf. Accessed 9 November 2013.
65. SiemieniukRAC, MillerP, WoodmanK, KoK, KrentzHB, et al. (2013) Prevalence, clinical associations, and impact of intimate partner violence among HIV-infected gay and bisexual men: a population-based study. HIV Med 14: 293–302.
66. IoannidisJP, PatsopoulosNA, EvangelouE (2007) Uncertainty in heterogeneity estimates in meta-analyses. BMJ 335: 914.
67. Donovan C, Hester M, Holmes J, McCarry M (2006) Comparing domestic abuse in same sex and heterosexual relationships. Available: http://www.bris.ac.uk/sps/research/projects/completed/2006/rc1307/rc1307finalreport.pdf. Sunderland (UK): University of Sunderland. Accessed 15 July 2013.
68. Stark E (2007) Coercive control: how men entrap women in personal life. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
69. JohnsonMP, LeoneJM (2005) The differential effects of intimate terrorism and situational couple violence findings from the national violence against women survey. J Fam Issues 26: 322–349.
70. ParsonsJT, StarksTJ, DuBoisS, GrovC, GolubSA (2013) Alternatives to monogamy among gay male couples in a community survey: implications for mental health and sexual risk. Arch Sex Behav 42: 303–312.
71. ParsonsJT, StarksTJ, GamarelKE, GrovC (2012) Non-monogamy and sexual relationship quality among same-sex male couples. J Fam Psychol 26: 669.
72. FinneranC, ChardA, SineathC, SullivanP, StephensonR (2012) Intimate partner violence and social pressure among gay men in six countries. West J Emerg Med 13: 260–271.
73. BaralS, SifakisF, CleghornF, BeyrerC (2007) Elevated risk for HIV infection among men who have sex with men in low- and middle-income countries 2000–2006: a systematic review. PLoS Med 4: e339.
74. StarksTJ, GrovC, ParsonsJT (2013) Sexual compulsivity and interpersonal functioning: sexual relationship quality and sexual health in gay relationships. Health Psychol 32: 1047–1056.
75. GrovC, StarksTJ, RendinaHJ, ParsonsJ (2012) Rules about casual sex partners, relationship satisfaction, and HIV risk in partnered gay and bisexual men. J Sex Marital Ther E-pub ahead of print. doi:10.1080/0092623X.2012.691948
76. Bertone-JohnsonER, WhitcombBW, MissmerSA, KarlsonEW, Rich-EdwardsJW (2012) Inflammation and early-life abuse in women. Am J Prev Med 43: 611–620.
77. OutD, HallRJ, GrangerDA, PageGG, WoodsSJ (2012) Assessing salivary C-reactive protein: longitudinal associations with systemic inflammation and cardiovascular disease risk in women exposed to intimate partner violence. Brain Behav Immun 26: 543–551.
78. Bacchus L, Aston G, Torres Vitolas C, Jordan P, et al. (2007) A theory-based evaluation of a multi-agency domestic violence service based in maternity and genitourinary services at Guys and St Thomas NHS Foundation Trust. London: Kings College London.
79. Torres-VitolasC, BacchusLJ, AstonG (2010) A comparison of the training needs of maternity and sexual health professionals in a London teaching hospital with regards to routine enquiry for domestic abuse. Public Health 124: 472–478.
80. Wood S, Bellis MA, Watts C (2010) Intimate partner violence. A review of evidence for prevention from the UK Focal Point for Violence and Injury Prevention. Available: http://www.eviper.org.uk/downloads/intemate_partner.pdf. Accessed 8 January 2014.
81. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (2014) Domestic violence and abuse. Identification and prevention. London: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Available: http://guidance.nice.org.uk/PHG/44#tab1.
Štítky
Interné lekárstvoČlánok vyšiel v časopise
PLOS Medicine
2014 Číslo 3
- Parazitičtí červi v terapii Crohnovy choroby a dalších zánětlivých autoimunitních onemocnění
- Pleiotropní účinky statinů na kardiovaskulární systém
- Statiny indukovaná myopatie: Jak na diferenciální diagnostiku?
- DESATORO PRE PRAX: Aktuálne odporúčanie ESPEN pre nutričný manažment u pacientov s COVID-19
- Význam hydratace při hojení ran
Najčítanejšie v tomto čísle
- and Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene: A Committed Relationship
- Representation and Misrepresentation of Scientific Evidence in Contemporary Tobacco Regulation: A Review of Tobacco Industry Submissions to the UK Government Consultation on Standardised Packaging
- The Role of Viral Introductions in Sustaining Community-Based HIV Epidemics in Rural Uganda: Evidence from Spatial Clustering, Phylogenetics, and Egocentric Transmission Models
- How Can Journals Respond to Threats of Libel Litigation?