Normal view MARC view ISBD view

Ecological pathways to prevention : how does the SASA! community mobilisation model work to prevent physical intimate partner violence against women? Tanya Abramsky, Karen M. Devries, Lori Michau, Janet Nakuti, Tina Musuya, Ligia Kiss, Nambusi Kyegombe and Charlotte Watts

By: Abramsky, Tanya.
Contributor(s): Devries, Karen | Michau, Lori | Nakuti, Janet | Masuya, Tina | Kiss, Ligia | Kyegombe, Nambusi | Watts, Charlotte.
Material type: materialTypeLabelArticleSeries: BMC Public Health.Publisher: BioMed Central, 2016Subject(s): ATTITUDES | DOMESTIC VIOLENCE | COMMUNITY ACTION | INTERVENTION | INTIMATE PARTNER VIOLENCE | PHYSICAL ABUSE | PRIMARY PREVENTION | RANDOMISED CONTROLLED TRIALS | SASA! study | PREVENTION | AFRICAOnline resources: Click here to access online In: BMC Public Health, 2016, 16: 339Summary: Background: Intimate partner violence (IPV) against women is a global public health concern. While community-level gender norms and attitudes to IPV are recognised drivers of IPV risk, there is little evidence on how interventions might tackle these drivers to prevent IPV at the community-level. This secondary analysis of data from the SASA! study explores the pathways through which SASA!, a community mobilisation intervention to prevent violence against women, achieved community-wide reductions in physical IPV. Methods: From 2007 to 2012 a cluster randomised controlled trial (CRT) was conducted in eight communities in Kampala, Uganda. Cross-sectional surveys of a random sample of community members, aged 18 – 49, were undertaken at baseline (n= 1583) and 4 years post intervention implementation (n= 2532). We used cluster-level intention to treat analysis to estimate SASA!'s community-level impact on women's past year experience of physical IPV and men’s past year perpetration of IPV. The mediating roles of community-, relationship- and individual-level factors in intervention effect on past year physical IPV experience (women)/perpetration (men) were explored using modified Poisson regression models. Results: SASA! was associated with reductions in women’s past year experience of physical IPV (0.48, 95 % CI 0.16 – 1.39), as well as men’s perpetration of IPV (0.39, 95 % CI 0.20 – 0.73). Community-level normative attitudes were the most important mediators of intervention impact on physical IPV risk, with norms around the acceptability of IPV explaining 70 % of the intervention effect on women’s experience of IPV and 95 % of the effect on men’s perpetration. The strongest relationship-level mediators were men’s reduced suspicion of partner infidelity (explaining 22 % of effect on men’s perpetration), and improved communication around sex (explaining 16 % of effect on women’s experience). Reduced acceptability of IPV among men was the most important individual-level mediator (explaining 42 % of effect on men’s perpetration). Conclusions: These results highlight the important role of community-level norm-change in achieving community-wide reductions in IPV risk. They lend strong support for the more widespread adoption of community-level approaches to preventing violence." (Authors' abstract). Record #4995
Item type Current location Call number Status Date due Barcode
Access online Access online Family Violence library
Online Available ON16050004

BMC Public Health, 2016, 16: 339

Background: Intimate partner violence (IPV) against women is a global public health concern. While community-level gender norms and attitudes to IPV are recognised drivers of IPV risk, there is little evidence on how interventions might tackle these drivers to prevent IPV at the community-level. This secondary analysis of data from the SASA! study explores the pathways through which SASA!, a community mobilisation intervention to prevent violence against women, achieved community-wide reductions in physical IPV.
Methods: From 2007 to 2012 a cluster randomised controlled trial (CRT) was conducted in eight communities in Kampala, Uganda. Cross-sectional surveys of a random sample of community members, aged 18 – 49, were undertaken at baseline (n= 1583) and 4 years post intervention implementation (n= 2532). We used cluster-level intention to treat analysis to estimate SASA!'s community-level impact on women's past year experience of physical IPV and men’s past
year perpetration of IPV. The mediating roles of community-, relationship- and individual-level factors in intervention effect on past year physical IPV experience (women)/perpetration (men) were explored using modified Poisson regression models.
Results: SASA! was associated with reductions in women’s past year experience of physical IPV (0.48, 95 % CI 0.16 – 1.39), as well as men’s perpetration of IPV (0.39, 95 % CI 0.20
– 0.73). Community-level normative attitudes were the most important mediators of intervention impact on physical IPV risk, with norms around the acceptability of IPV explaining 70 % of the intervention effect on women’s experience of IPV and 95 % of the effect on men’s perpetration. The strongest relationship-level mediators were men’s reduced suspicion of
partner infidelity (explaining 22 % of effect on men’s perpetration), and improved communication around sex
(explaining 16 % of effect on women’s experience). Reduced acceptability of IPV among men was the most important individual-level mediator (explaining 42 % of effect on men’s perpetration).
Conclusions: These results highlight the important role of community-level norm-change in achieving community-wide reductions in IPV risk. They lend strong support for the more widespread adoption of community-level approaches to preventing violence." (Authors' abstract). Record #4995