Domains of common mental disorders in women reporting intimate partner violence
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1590/1518-8345.2740.3099Keywords:
Women, Mental Disorders, Intimate Partner Violence, Mental Health, Nursing, Public HealthAbstract
Objective: to verify associations between the types of intimate partner violence and the domains of common mental disorders in women. Method: cross-sectional study with 369 women. The information was obtained through the instruments Self-Reporting Questionnaire and Conflict Tactic Scales. To analyze the data, Pearson’s Chi-Square test, Fisher’s exact test and Odds Ratio were used. Results: women who reported physical abuse with and without sequela were respectively 2.58 and 3.7 times more likely to have symptoms of anxious depressed mood. The chances of experiencing symptoms of decreased vital energy increased by 2.27 times with psychological aggression, 3.06 times with physical abuse without sequelae and 3.13 times with physical abuse with sequelae. Somatic symptoms did not show statistical association with the types of violence. The propensity to develop symptoms of depressive thoughts increased 3.11 times with psychological aggression, 6.13 times with physical aggression without sequelae, 2.47 times with sexual coercion and 7.3 times with physical aggression with sequelae. Conclusion: the types of intimate partner violence are strongly associated with the domains of common mental disorders in women. This finding may contribute to more accurate interventions by health professionals to women victims of violence.
Downloads
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
RLAE’s authorship concept is based on the substantial contribution by each of the individuals listed as authors, mainly in terms of conceiving and planning the research project, collecting or analyzing and interpreting data, writing and critical review. Indication of authors’ names under the article title is limited to six. If more, authors are listed on the online submission form under Acknowledgements. The possibility of including more than six authors will only be examined on multicenter studies, considering the explanations presented by the authors.Including names of authors whose contribution does not fit into the above criteria cannot be justified. Those names can be included in the Acknowledgements section.
Authors are fully responsible for the concepts disseminated in their manuscripts, which do not necessarily reflect the editors’ and editorial board’s opinion.