Barriers to Screening Pregnant Women for Domestic Violence: A Cross-Sectional Study | OMICS International| Abstract
ISSN: 2471-9846

Journal of Community & Public Health Nursing
Open Access

Like us on:

Our Group organises 3000+ Global Conferenceseries Events every year across USA, Europe & Asia with support from 1000 more scientific Societies and Publishes 700+ Open Access Journals which contains over 50000 eminent personalities, reputed scientists as editorial board members.

Open Access Journals gaining more Readers and Citations
700 Journals and 15,000,000 Readers Each Journal is getting 25,000+ Readers

This Readership is 10 times more when compared to other Subscription Journals (Source: Google Analytics)
  • Research Article   
  • J Comm Pub Health Nurs 2018, Vol 4(1): 207
  • DOI: 10.4172/2471-9846.1000207

Barriers to Screening Pregnant Women for Domestic Violence: A Cross-Sectional Study

Simon Nderiru Githui*, Margaret Chege, Miriam CA Wagoro and James Mwaura
Department of Nursing, University of Eastern Africa Baraton, Eldoret, Kenya
*Corresponding Author : Simon Nderiru Githui MScN, Department of Nursing, University of Eastern Africa Baraton, Baraton Eldoret, Eldoret 30100, Kenya, Tel: +254735 744 252, Email: [email protected]

Received Date: Dec 26, 2017 / Accepted Date: Jan 09, 2018 / Published Date: Jan 17, 2018


Background information: Domestic Violence (DV) is associated with serious consequences to the survivor’s physical, emotional, sexual, social and mental well-being. DV screening ensures timely detection of violence and hence promotes timely intervention. This timely intervention has the potential of averting adverse outcomes of DV to the survivor. Globally, the prevalence of DV among women is 35% and in Kenya its 49% among women and 13.5% among pregnant women. Despite the adverse outcome of DV in pregnancy, screening during pregnancy lags behind in Kenya.
Purpose: To assess the nursing barriers to screening pregnant women for DV.
Methodology: A cross-sectional study of 125 nurses selected by random sampling method was conducted at a National Maternity Hospital in Kenya. Data was collected for 8 weeks using researchers developed structured questionnaire. Data was analyzed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 20.0. Chi-square test was used to determine significance of relationships between nominal variables. A P-value of ≤ 0.05 was considered significant.
Results: Study results revealed that 16% (n=8) of nurses routinely screened pregnant women for DV. Nonscreening behavior of nurses was associated with lack of DV screening training during their education program (P=0.002), fear of the partner’s reaction (P=0.004) and lack of mentors and role models in DV screening (P=0.005). Lack of cooperation from other health professionals was also associated with non-screening of DV (P=0.016).
The significance of the study: The results of this study point to the need of developing hospital’s protocols on DV management and considering integrating DV screening in the routine medical screening of pregnant women during antenatal care.
Conclusion: The study showed that the nurse’s prevalence of screening pregnant women for DV is low at 16% due to various barriers.

Keywords: Barriers; Domestic violence; Screening; Pregnant women; Nurse

Citation: Githui SN, Chege M, Wagoro MCA, Mwaura J (2018) Barriers to Screening Pregnant Women for Domestic Violence: A Cross-Sectional Study. J Comm Pub Health Nurs 4: 207. Doi: 10.4172/2471-9846.1000207

Copyright: ©2018 Githui SN, et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Select your language of interest to view the total content in your interested language

Post Your Comment Citation
Share This Article
Article Usage
  • Total views: 2562
  • [From(publication date): 0-2018 - Feb 27, 2021]
  • Breakdown by view type
  • HTML page views: 2383
  • PDF downloads: 179