Which men change in intimate partner violence prevention interventions? A trajectory analysis in Rwanda and South Africa

Introduction Emerging evidence suggests working with men to prevent intimate partner violence (IPV) perpetration can be effective. However, it is unknown whether all men benefit equally, or whether different groups of men respond differentially to interventions.Methods We conducted trajectory modell...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Rachel Jewkes, Nicola J Christofides, Andrew Gibbs, Esnat Chirwa, Kristin Dunkle, Shibe Mhlongo, Abigail Hatcher
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMJ Publishing Group 2020-05-01
Series:BMJ Global Health
Online Access:https://gh.bmj.com/content/5/5/e002199.full
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1850213269077229568
author Rachel Jewkes
Nicola J Christofides
Andrew Gibbs
Esnat Chirwa
Kristin Dunkle
Shibe Mhlongo
Abigail Hatcher
author_facet Rachel Jewkes
Nicola J Christofides
Andrew Gibbs
Esnat Chirwa
Kristin Dunkle
Shibe Mhlongo
Abigail Hatcher
author_sort Rachel Jewkes
collection DOAJ
description Introduction Emerging evidence suggests working with men to prevent intimate partner violence (IPV) perpetration can be effective. However, it is unknown whether all men benefit equally, or whether different groups of men respond differentially to interventions.Methods We conducted trajectory modelling using longitudinal data from men enrolled in intervention arms of three IPV trials in South Africa and Rwanda to identify trajectories of IPV perpetration. We then use multinomial regression to describe baseline characteristics associated with group allocation.Results In South Africa, the Stepping Stones and Creating Futures (SS-CF) trial had 289 men and the CHANGE trial had 803 men, and in Rwanda, Indashyikirwa had 821 men. We identified three trajectories of IPV perpetration: a low-flat (60%–67% of men), high with large reduction (19%–24%) and high with slight increase (10%–21%). Baseline factors associated men in high-start IPV trajectories, compared with low-flat trajectory, varied by study, but included higher poverty, poorer mental health, greater substance use, younger age and more childhood traumas. Attitudes supportive of IPV were consistently associated with high-start trajectories. In separate models comparing high-reducing to high-increasing trajectories, baseline factors associated with reduced IPV perpetration were depressive symptoms (relative risk ratio, RRR=3.06, p=0.01 SS-CF); living separately from their partner (RRR=2.14, p=0.01 CHANGE); recent employment (RRR=1.85, p=0.04 CHANGE) and lower acceptability of IPV (RRR=0.60, p=0.08 Indashyikirwa). Older aged men had a trend towards reducing IPV perpetration in CHANGE (p=0.06) and younger men in Indashyikirwa (p=0.07).Conclusions Three distinct groups of men differed in their response to IPV prevention interventions. Baseline characteristics of past traumas and current poverty, mental health and gender beliefs predicted trajectory group allocation. The analysis may inform targeting of interventions towards those who have propensity to change or guide how contextual factors may alter intervention effects.Trial registration numbers NCT03022370; NCT02823288; NCT03477877.
format Article
id doaj-art-d166ce614fa04c3b9dd41fec3aaad131
institution OA Journals
issn 2059-7908
language English
publishDate 2020-05-01
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format Article
series BMJ Global Health
spelling doaj-art-d166ce614fa04c3b9dd41fec3aaad1312025-08-20T02:09:10ZengBMJ Publishing GroupBMJ Global Health2059-79082020-05-015510.1136/bmjgh-2019-002199Which men change in intimate partner violence prevention interventions? A trajectory analysis in Rwanda and South AfricaRachel Jewkes0Nicola J Christofides1Andrew Gibbs2Esnat Chirwa3Kristin Dunkle4Shibe Mhlongo5Abigail Hatcher6Office of the Executive Scientist, South African Medical Research Council, Cape Town, South AfricaSchool of Public Health, University of the Witwatersrand Faculty of Health Sciences, Johannesburg, Gauteng, South AfricaPsychology, University of Exeter, Exeter, UKGender and Health Research Unit, South African Medical Research Council, Pretoria, Gauteng, South AfricaGender and Health Research Unit, South African Medical Research Council, Pretoria, Gauteng, South AfricaGender and Health Research Unit, South African Medical Research Council, Cape Town, South AfricaSchool of Public Health, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South AfricaIntroduction Emerging evidence suggests working with men to prevent intimate partner violence (IPV) perpetration can be effective. However, it is unknown whether all men benefit equally, or whether different groups of men respond differentially to interventions.Methods We conducted trajectory modelling using longitudinal data from men enrolled in intervention arms of three IPV trials in South Africa and Rwanda to identify trajectories of IPV perpetration. We then use multinomial regression to describe baseline characteristics associated with group allocation.Results In South Africa, the Stepping Stones and Creating Futures (SS-CF) trial had 289 men and the CHANGE trial had 803 men, and in Rwanda, Indashyikirwa had 821 men. We identified three trajectories of IPV perpetration: a low-flat (60%–67% of men), high with large reduction (19%–24%) and high with slight increase (10%–21%). Baseline factors associated men in high-start IPV trajectories, compared with low-flat trajectory, varied by study, but included higher poverty, poorer mental health, greater substance use, younger age and more childhood traumas. Attitudes supportive of IPV were consistently associated with high-start trajectories. In separate models comparing high-reducing to high-increasing trajectories, baseline factors associated with reduced IPV perpetration were depressive symptoms (relative risk ratio, RRR=3.06, p=0.01 SS-CF); living separately from their partner (RRR=2.14, p=0.01 CHANGE); recent employment (RRR=1.85, p=0.04 CHANGE) and lower acceptability of IPV (RRR=0.60, p=0.08 Indashyikirwa). Older aged men had a trend towards reducing IPV perpetration in CHANGE (p=0.06) and younger men in Indashyikirwa (p=0.07).Conclusions Three distinct groups of men differed in their response to IPV prevention interventions. Baseline characteristics of past traumas and current poverty, mental health and gender beliefs predicted trajectory group allocation. The analysis may inform targeting of interventions towards those who have propensity to change or guide how contextual factors may alter intervention effects.Trial registration numbers NCT03022370; NCT02823288; NCT03477877.https://gh.bmj.com/content/5/5/e002199.full
spellingShingle Rachel Jewkes
Nicola J Christofides
Andrew Gibbs
Esnat Chirwa
Kristin Dunkle
Shibe Mhlongo
Abigail Hatcher
Which men change in intimate partner violence prevention interventions? A trajectory analysis in Rwanda and South Africa
BMJ Global Health
title Which men change in intimate partner violence prevention interventions? A trajectory analysis in Rwanda and South Africa
title_full Which men change in intimate partner violence prevention interventions? A trajectory analysis in Rwanda and South Africa
title_fullStr Which men change in intimate partner violence prevention interventions? A trajectory analysis in Rwanda and South Africa
title_full_unstemmed Which men change in intimate partner violence prevention interventions? A trajectory analysis in Rwanda and South Africa
title_short Which men change in intimate partner violence prevention interventions? A trajectory analysis in Rwanda and South Africa
title_sort which men change in intimate partner violence prevention interventions a trajectory analysis in rwanda and south africa
url https://gh.bmj.com/content/5/5/e002199.full
work_keys_str_mv AT racheljewkes whichmenchangeinintimatepartnerviolencepreventioninterventionsatrajectoryanalysisinrwandaandsouthafrica
AT nicolajchristofides whichmenchangeinintimatepartnerviolencepreventioninterventionsatrajectoryanalysisinrwandaandsouthafrica
AT andrewgibbs whichmenchangeinintimatepartnerviolencepreventioninterventionsatrajectoryanalysisinrwandaandsouthafrica
AT esnatchirwa whichmenchangeinintimatepartnerviolencepreventioninterventionsatrajectoryanalysisinrwandaandsouthafrica
AT kristindunkle whichmenchangeinintimatepartnerviolencepreventioninterventionsatrajectoryanalysisinrwandaandsouthafrica
AT shibemhlongo whichmenchangeinintimatepartnerviolencepreventioninterventionsatrajectoryanalysisinrwandaandsouthafrica
AT abigailhatcher whichmenchangeinintimatepartnerviolencepreventioninterventionsatrajectoryanalysisinrwandaandsouthafrica