Interventions for preventing nausea and vomiting in women undergoing regional anaesthesia for caesarean section.

BACKGROUND: Nausea and vomiting are distressing symptoms which are experienced commonly during caesarean section under regional anaesthesia and in the postoperative period.  OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy of pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions versus placebo or no intervention given prophylactically to prevent nausea and vomiting in women undergoing regional anaesthesia for caesarean section. SEARCH METHODS: For this update, we searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (16 April 2020), and reference lists of retrieved studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of studies and conference abstracts, and excluded quasi-RCTs and cross-over studies. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Review authors independently assessed the studies for inclusion, assessed risk of bias and carried out data extraction. Our primary outcomes are intraoperative and postoperative nausea and vomiting. Data entry was checked. Two review authors independently assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: Eighty-four studies (involving 10,990 women) met our inclusion criteria. Sixty-nine studies, involving 8928 women, contributed data. Most studies involved women undergoing elective caesarean section. Many studies were small with unclear risk of bias and sometimes few events. The overall certainty of the evidence assessed using GRADE was moderate to very low. 5-HT3 antagonists: We found intraoperative nausea may be reduced by 5-HT3 antagonists (average risk ratio (aRR) 0.55, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.42 to 0.71, 12 studies, 1419 women, low-certainty evidence). There may be a reduction in intraoperative vomiting but the evidence is very uncertain (aRR 0.46, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.73, 11 studies, 1414 women, very low-certainty evidence). There is probably a reduction in postoperative nausea (aRR 0.40, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.54, 10 studies, 1340 women, moderate-certainty evidence), and these drugs may show a reduction in postoperative vomiting (aRR 0.47, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.69, 10 studies, 1450 women, low-certainty evidence). Dopamine antagonists: We found dopamine antagonists may reduce intraoperative nausea but the evidence is very uncertain (aRR 0.38, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.52, 15 studies, 1180 women, very low-certainty evidence). Dopamine antagonists may reduce intraoperative vomiting (aRR 0.41, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.60, 12 studies, 942 women, low-certainty evidence) and postoperative nausea (aRR 0.61, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.79, 7 studies, 601 women, low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain if dopamine antagonists reduce postoperative vomiting (aRR 0.63, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.92, 9 studies, 860 women, very low-certainty evidence). Corticosteroids (steroids): We are uncertain if intraoperative nausea is reduced by corticosteroids (aRR 0.56, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.83, 6 studies, 609 women, very low-certainty evidence) similarly for intraoperative vomiting (aRR 0.52, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.87, 6 studies, 609 women, very low-certainty evidence). Corticosteroids probably reduce postoperative nausea (aRR 0.59, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.73, 6 studies, 733 women, moderate-certainty evidence), and may reduce postoperative vomiting (aRR 0.68, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.95, 7 studies, 793 women, low-certainty evidence). Antihistamines: Antihistamines may have little to no effect on intraoperative nausea (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.47 to 2.11, 1 study, 149 women, very low-certainty evidence) or intraoperative vomiting (no events in the one study of 149 women). Antihistamines may reduce postoperative nausea (aRR 0.44, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.64, 4 studies, 514 women, low-certainty evidence), however, we are uncertain whether antihistamines reduce postoperative vomiting (average RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.81, 3 studies, 333 women, very low-certainty evidence). Anticholinergics: Anticholinergics may reduce intraoperative nausea (aRR 0.67, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.87, 4 studies, 453 women, low-certainty evidence) but may have little to no effect on intraoperative vomiting (aRR 0.79, 95% CI 0.40 to 1.54, 4 studies; 453 women, very low-certainty evidence). No studies looked at anticholinergics in postoperative nausea, but they may reduce postoperative vomiting (aRR 0.55, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.74, 1 study, 161 women, low-certainty evidence). Sedatives: We found that sedatives probably reduce intraoperative nausea (aRR 0.65, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.82, 8 studies, 593 women, moderate-certainty evidence) and intraoperative vomiting (aRR 0.35, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.52, 8 studies, 593 women, moderate-certainty evidence). However, we are uncertain whether sedatives reduce postoperative nausea (aRR 0.25, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.71, 2 studies, 145 women, very low-certainty evidence) and they may reduce postoperative vomiting (aRR 0.09, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.28, 2 studies, 145 women, low-certainty evidence). Opioid antagonists: There were no studies assessing intraoperative nausea or vomiting. Opioid antagonists may result in little or no difference to the number of women having postoperative nausea (aRR 0.75, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.45, 1 study, 120 women, low-certainty evidence) or postoperative vomiting (aRR 1.25, 95% CI 0.35 to 4.43, 1 study, 120 women, low-certainty evidence). Acupressure: It is uncertain whether acupressure/acupuncture reduces intraoperative nausea (aRR 0.55, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.74, 9 studies, 1221 women, very low-certainty evidence). Acupressure may reduce intraoperative vomiting (aRR 0.52, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.80, 9 studies, 1221 women, low-certainty evidence) but it is uncertain whether it reduces postoperative nausea (aRR 0.46, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.75, 7 studies, 1069 women, very low-certainty evidence) or postoperative vomiting (aRR 0.52, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.79, 7 studies, 1069 women, very low-certainty evidence). Ginger: It is uncertain whether ginger makes any difference to the number of women having intraoperative nausea (aRR 0.66, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.21, 2 studies, 331 women, very low-certainty evidence), intraoperative vomiting (aRR 0.62, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.00, 2 studies, 331 women, very low-certainty evidence), postoperative nausea (aRR 0.63, 95% CI 0.22 to 1.77, 1 study, 92 women, very low-certainty evidence) and postoperative vomiting (aRR 0.20, 95% CI 0.02 to 1.65, 1 study, 92 women, very low-certainty evidence). Few studies assessed our secondary outcomes including adverse effects or women's views. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review indicates that 5-HT3 antagonists, dopamine antagonists, corticosteroids, sedatives and acupressure probably or possibly have efficacy in reducing nausea and vomiting in women undergoing regional anaesthesia for caesarean section. However the certainty of evidence varied widely and was generally low. Future research is needed to assess side effects of treatment, women's views and to compare the efficacy of combinations of different medications.

Giving women their own case notes to carry during pregnancy.

BACKGROUND: In many countries women are given their own case notes to carry during pregnancy to increase their sense of control over, and satisfaction with, their care. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of giving women their own case notes to carry during pregnancy. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (31 August 2015) and reference lists of retrieved studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials of women given their own case notes to carry during pregnancy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently applied the inclusion criteria and assessed study quality. One review author extracted data from the included studies using a standard form (checked by second review author). We assessed estimates of effect using risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). The quality of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: Four trials were included (n = 1176 women). Overall, the quality of the evidence was graded as low to moderate mainly due to the nature of the intervention not allowing blinding. The updated search identified one cluster-randomised trial, which was included.Women carrying their own notes were more likely to feel in control (two trials, RR 1.56, 95% CI 1.18 to 2.06; 450 women; moderate quality evidence), although there is no evidence of difference in women's satisfaction (two trials, average RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.29); 698 women; low quality evidence). More women in the case notes group wanted to carry their own notes in a subsequent pregnancy (three trials, RR 1.79, 95% CI 1.57 to 2.03; 552 women; low quality evidence). Overall, the pooled estimate of the two trials (n = 347) that reported on the risk of notes lost or left at home was not significant (average RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.04 to 3.84). There was no evidence of difference for health-related behaviours (cigarette smoking and breastfeeding (moderate quality evidence)), analgesia needs during labour (low quality evidence), maternal depression, miscarriage, stillbirth and neonatal deaths (moderate quality evidence). More women in the case notes group had operative deliveries (one trial, RR 1.83, 95% CI 1.08 to 3.12; 212 women), and caesarean sections (one trial, average RR 1.51, 95% CI 1.10 to 2.08; 501 women; moderate quality evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The four trials are small, and not all of them reported on all outcomes. The results suggest that there are both potential benefits (increased maternal control and increased availability of antenatal records during hospital attendance) and harms (more operative deliveries). Importantly, all of the trials report that more women in the case notes group would prefer to carry their antenatal records in another pregnancy. There is insufficient evidence on health-related behaviours (smoking and breastfeeding), women's satisfaction, and clinical outcomes. It is important to emphasise that this review shows a lack of evidence of benefit rather than evidence of no benefit.

Interventions at caesarean section for reducing the risk of aspiration pneumonitis.

BACKGROUND: Aspiration pneumonitis is a syndrome resulting from the inhalation of gastric contents. The incidence in obstetric anaesthesia has fallen, largely due to improved anaesthetic techniques and the increased use of regional anaesthesia at caesarean section. However, aspiration pneumonitis is still a cause of maternal morbidity and mortality, and it is important to use effective prophylaxis. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether interventions given prior to caesarean section reduce the risk of aspiration pneumonitis in women with an uncomplicated pregnancy. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (30 April 2013). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials were included. Quasi-randomised trials were excluded. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Review authors independently assessed the studies for inclusion, assessed risk of bias and carried out data extraction. Data entry was checked. Fixed-effect meta-analysis was used to combine data where it was reasonable to assume that studies were estimating the same underlying treatment effect. If substantial clinical or statistical heterogeneity was detected, we used random-effects analysis to produce an overall summary. MAIN RESULTS: Thirty-two studies were included in this review. However, only 22 studies, involving 2658 women, provided data for analysis. All the women in the included studies had a caesarean section under general anaesthesia. The studies covered a number of comparisons, but were mostly small and of unclear or poor quality.When compared with no treatment or placebo, there was a significant reduction in the risk of intragastric pH < 2.5 with antacids (risk ratio (RR) 0.17, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.09 to 0.32, two studies, 108 women), H2 antagonists (RR 0.09, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.18, two studies, 170 women) and proton pump antagonists (RR 0.26, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.46, one study 80 women). H2 antagonists were associated with a reduced the risk of intragastric pH < 2.5 at intubation when compared with proton pump antagonists (RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.97, one study, 120 women), but compared with antacids the findings were unclear. The combined use of 'antacids plus H2 antagonists' was associated with a significant reduction in the risk of intragastric pH < 2.5 at intubation when compared with placebo (RR 0.02, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.15, one study, 89 women) or compared with antacids alone (RR 0.12, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.92, one study, 119 women). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The quality of the evidence was poor, but the findings suggest that the combination of antacids plus H2 antagonists was more effective than no intervention, and superior to antacids alone in preventing low gastric pH. However, none of the studies assessed potential adverse effects or substantive clinical outcomes. These findings are relevant for all women undergoing caesarean section under general anaesthesia.

Package of care for active management in labour for reducing caesarean section rates in low-risk women.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 15% of women have caesarean sections (CS) and while the rate varies, the number is increasing in many countries. This is of concern because higher CS rates do not confer additional health gain but may adversely affect maternal health and have implications for future pregnancies. Active management of labour has been proposed as a means of reducing CS rates. This refers to a package of care including strict diagnosis of labour, routine amniotomy, oxytocin for slow progress and one-to-one support in labour. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether active management of labour reduces CS rates in low-risk women and improves satisfaction. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (16 April 2013). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing low-risk women receiving a predefined package of care (active management) with women receiving routine (variable) care. Trials where slow progress had been diagnosed before entry into the trial were excluded. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: At least two review authors extracted data. We assessed included studies for risk of bias. MAIN RESULTS: We included seven trials, with a total of 5390 women. The quality of studies was mixed. The CS rate was slightly lower in the active management group compared with the group that received routine care, but this difference did not reach statistical significance (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.01). However, in one study there was a large number of post-randomisation exclusions. On excluding this study, CS rates in the active management group were statistically significantly lower than in the routine care group (RR 0.77 95% CI 0.63 to 0.94). More women in the active management group had labours lasting less than 12 hours, but there was wide variation in length of labour within and between trials. There were no differences between groups in use of analgesia, rates of assisted vaginal deliveries or maternal or neonatal complications. Only one trial examined maternal satisfaction; the majority of women (over 75%) in both groups were very satisfied with care. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Active management is associated with small reductions in the CS rate, but it is highly prescriptive and interventional. It is possible that some components of the active management package are more effective than others. Further work is required to determine the acceptability of active management to women in labour.

Interventions for preventing nausea and vomiting in women undergoing regional anaesthesia for caesarean section.

BACKGROUND: Nausea and vomiting are distressing symptoms which are experienced commonly during caesarean section under regional anaesthesia and can also occur in the period following the procedure.  OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy of pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions given prophylactically to prevent nausea and vomiting in women undergoing regional anaesthesia for caesarean section. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (27 February 2012) and reference lists of identified studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and excluded quasi-RCTs and cross-over studies. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Review authors independently assessed the studies for inclusion, assessed risk of bias and carried out data extraction. Data entry was checked.   MAIN RESULTS: Fifty-two studies met the inclusion criteria but only 41 studies, involving 5046 women, provided useable data for the review involving women having caesareans under regional anaesthesia. The majority of the studies involved women undergoing elective caesarean section. Only two studies included emergency surgery, however, they did not stratify data according to type of surgery. The studies covered numerous comparisons, but the majority of studies involved 5-HT(3) receptor antagonists, dopamine receptor antagonists, corticosteroids or acupressure. Studies were mainly small and of unclear quality.Three classes of intervention were found to be effective in at least three out of four of our primary outcomes (intraoperative nausea, intraoperative vomiting, postoperative nausea and postoperative vomiting). These interventions were 5-HT(3) antagonists, dopamine antagonists and sedatives. Other classes of intervention were effective for fewer than three of our primary outcomes.With 5-HT antagonists, we found a reduction in intraoperative nausea (average risk ratio (RR) 0.64, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.46 to 0.88, eight studies, 720 women). There were also reductions in postoperative nausea (average RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.64, four studies, 405 women) and vomiting (average RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.77, five studies, 565 women). We did not detect a significant reduction in intraoperative vomiting (average RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.00, seven studies, 668 women).Dopamine antagonists demonstrated a reduction in intraoperative nausea (average RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.57, nine studies, 636 women) and intraoperative vomiting (average 0.39, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.64, eight studies, 536 women), with similar reductions in postoperative nausea (average RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.91, five studies, 412 women) and vomiting (average RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.91, six studies, 472 women). These differences were observed with both metoclopramide and droperidol.Sedatives (most commonly propofol) demonstrated a reduction in intraoperative nausea (average RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.96, four studies, 285 women) and intraoperative vomiting (average RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.68, four studies, 285 women), also with a reduction in postoperative nausea (average RR 0.25, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.71, two studies 145 women) and vomiting (average RR 0.09, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.28, two studies, 145 women).Acupressure was found to be effective for intraoperative nausea (average RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.90, six studies, 649 women) but not postoperative nausea (average RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.00, three studies, 429 women). Acupressure was not effective at reducing vomiting either intraoperatively (average RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.18, six studies, 649 women) or postoperatively (average RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.06, three studies, 429 women).Other effective intervention classes included corticosteroids, antihistamines, and anticholinergics.There were insufficient data to demonstrate any class of intervention was superior to another. There were no significant differences observed in the comparison of combined versus single interventions.Few studies assessed our secondary outcomes or the incidence of adverse effects. However, one study showed an increase in respiratory depression with sedation (midazolam) compared with dopamine antagonists. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review indicates that many different interventions have efficacy in preventing nausea and vomiting in women undergoing regional anaesthesia for caesarean section. There is little evidence that combinations of treatment are better than single agents.

Interventions at caesarean section for reducing the risk of aspiration pneumonitis.

BACKGROUND: Aspiration pneumonitis is a syndrome resulting from the inhalation of gastric contents. The incidence in obstetric anaesthesia has fallen, largely due to improved anaesthetic techniques and the increased use of regional anaesthesia at caesarean section. However, aspiration pneumonitis is still a cause of maternal morbidity and mortality, and it is important to use effective prophylaxis. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether interventions given prior to caesarean section reduce the risk of aspiration pneumonitis in women with an uncomplicated pregnancy. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (April 2009). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials were included. Quasi-randomised trials were excluded. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Authors independently assessed the studies for inclusion, assessed risk of bias and carried out data extraction. Data entry was checked. MAIN RESULTS: Twenty-two studies, involving 2658 women, are included, all having a caesarean section under general anaesthesia. The studies covered a number of comparisons, but were mostly small and of unclear or poor quality.When compared to no treatment or placebo, there was a significant reduction in the risk of intragastric pH < 2.5 with antacids (risk ratio (RR) 0.17, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.09 to 0.32, two studies, 108 women), H(2) antagonists (RR 0.09, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.18, two studies, 170 women) and proton pump antagonists (RR 0.26, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.46, one study 80 women). H(2) antagonists were associated with a reduced the risk of intragastric pH < 2.5 at intubation when compared with proton pump antagonists (RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.97, one study, 120 women), but compared with antacids the findings were unclear. The combined use of 'antacids plus H(2) antagonists' was associated with a significant reduction in the risk of intragastric pH < 2.5 at intubation when compared with placebo (RR 0.02, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.15, one study, 89 women) or compared with antacids alone (RR 0.12, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.92, one study, 119 women). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The quality of the evidence was poor, but the findings suggest that the combination of antacids plus H(2) antagonists was more effective than no intervention, and superior to antacids alone in preventing low gastric pH. However, none of the studies assessed potential adverse effects or substantive clinical outcomes. These findings are relevant for all women undergoing caesarean section under general anaesthesia.

Package of care for active management in labour for reducing caesarean section rates in low-risk women.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 15% of women have caesarean sections (CS) and while the rate varies, the number is increasing in many countries. This is of concern because higher CS rates do not confer additional health gain but may adversely affect maternal health and have implications for future pregnancies. Active management of labour has been proposed as a means of reducing CS rates. This refers to a package of care including strict diagnosis of labour, routine amniotomy, oxytocin for slow progress and one to one support in labour. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether active management of labour reduces CS rates in low-risk women and improves satisfaction. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (February 2008), MEDLINE (1966 to December 2007), EMBASE (1980 to 2007), MIDIRS (1985 to 2007) and CINAHL (1982 to 2007). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing low-risk women receiving a predefined package of care (active management) with women receiving routine (variable) care. Trials where slow progress had been diagnosed before entry into the trial were excluded. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: At least two review authors extracted data. We assessed included studies for risk of bias. MAIN RESULTS: We included seven trials, with a total of 5390 women. The quality of studies was mixed. The CS rate was slightly lower in the active management group compared to the group that received routine care, but this difference did not reach statistical significance (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.01). However, in one study there was a large number of post-randomisation exclusions. On excluding this study, CS rates in the active management group were statistically significantly lower than in the routine care group (RR 0.77 95% CI 0.63 to 0.94). More women in the active management group had labours lasting less than twelve hours, but there was wide variation in length of labour within and between trials. There were no differences between groups in use of analgesia, rates of assisted vaginal deliveries or maternal or neonatal complications. Only one trial examined maternal satisfaction; the majority of women (over 75%) in both groups were very satisfied with care. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Active management is associated with small reductions in the CS rate, but it is highly prescriptive and interventional. It is possible that some components of the active management package are more effective than others. Further work is required to determine the acceptability of active management to women in labour.

Transactional sex among women in Soweto, South Africa: prevalence, risk factors and association with HIV infection.

Sex workers have long been considered a high-risk group for HIV infection, but to date little quantitative research has explored the association between HIV risk and exchange of sex for material gain by women in the general population. The objective of this study was to estimate the prevalence of such transactional sex among women attending antenatal clinics in Soweto, South Africa, to identify demographic and social variables associated with reporting transactional sex, and to determine the association between transactional sex and HIV serostatus. We conducted a cross-sectional study of women seeking antenatal care in four Soweto health centres who accepted routine antenatal HIV testing. Private face-to-face interviews covered socio-demographics, sexual history and experience of gender-based violence. 21.1% of participants reported having ever had sex with a non-primary male partner in exchange for material goods or money. Women who reported past experience of violence by male intimate partners, problematic substance use, urban residence, ever earning money, or living in substandard housing were more likely to report transactional sex, while women who reported delayed first coitus, were married, or had a post-secondary education were less likely to report transactional sex. Transactional sex was associated with HIV seropositivity after controlling for lifetime number of male sex partners and length of time a woman had been sexually active (OR = 1.54, 95% CI: 1.07, 2.21). Women who reported non-primary partners without transactional sex did not have increased odds of being HIV seropositive (OR = 1.04, 95% CI: 0.75, 1.43). We conclude that transactional sex may place women at increased risk for HIV, and is associated with gender-based violence, substance use and socio-economic disadvantage. Research, policy and programmatic initiatives should consider the role of transactional sex in women's HIV risk, with attention to the intersecting roles of violence, poverty, and substance use in shaping women's sexual behaviour.

Prevalence and patterns of gender-based violence and revictimization among women attending antenatal clinics in Soweto, South Africa.

Gender-based violence is a key health risk for women globally and in South Africa. The authors analyzed data from 1,395 interviews with women attending antenatal clinics in Soweto, South Africa, between November 2001 and April 2002 to estimate the prevalence of physical/sexual partner violence (55.5%), adult sexual assault by nonpartners (7.9%), child sexual assault (8.0%), and forced first intercourse (7.3%). Age at first experience of each type of violence was modeled by the Kaplan-Meier method, and Cox hazard models with time-varying covariates were used to explore whether child sexual assault and forced first intercourse were associated with risk of violent revictimization in adulthood. Child sexual assault was associated with increased risk of physical and/or sexual partner violence (risk ratio = 2.43, 95% confidence interval: 1.93, 3.06) and with adult sexual assault by a nonpartner (risk ratio = 2.33, 95% confidence interval: 1.40, 3.89). Forced first intercourse was associated with increased risk of physical and/or sexual partner violence (risk ratio = 2.64, 95% confidence interval: 2.07, 3.38) and nonsignificantly with adult sexual assault by a nonpartner (risk ratio = 2.14, 95% confidence interval: 0.92, 4.98). This study confirms the need for increased attention by the public health community to primary and secondary prevention of gender-based violence, with a specific need to reduce risk among South African adolescents.

Gender-based violence, relationship power, and risk of HIV infection in women attending antenatal clinics in South Africa.

BACKGROUND: Gender-based violence and gender inequality are increasingly cited as important determinants of women's HIV risk; yet empirical research on possible connections remains limited. No study on women has yet assessed gender-based violence as a risk factor for HIV after adjustment for women's own high-risk behaviours, although these are known to be associated with experience of violence. METHODS: We did a cross-sectional study of 1366 women presenting for antenatal care at four health centres in Soweto, South Africa, who accepted routine antenatal HIV testing. Private face-to-face interviews were done in local languages and included assessement of sociodemographic characteristics, experience of gender-based violence, the South African adaptation of the Sexual Relationship Power Scale (SRPS), and risk behaviours including multiple, concurrent, and casual male partners, and transactional sex. FINDINGS: After adjustment for age and current relationship status and women's risk behaviour, intimate partner violence (odds ratio 1.48, 95% CI 1.15-1.89) and high levels of male control in a woman's current relationship as measured by the SRPS (1.52, 1.13-2.04) were associated with HIV seropositivity. Child sexual assault, forced first intercourse, and adult sexual assault by non-partners were not associated with HIV serostatus. INTERPRETATION: Women with violent or controlling male partners are at increased risk of HIV infection. We postulate that abusive men are more likely to have HIV and impose risky sexual practices on partners. Research on connections between social constructions of masculinity, intimate partner violence, male dominance in relationships, and HIV risk behaviours in men, as well as effective interventions, are urgently needed.