Intimate partner and family violence (IPFV) and mental health during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic -a multi-country survey

Roxanne Keynejad¹Oliva Nalwadda²Bushra Syed³Buruwaa Adomako Agyekum⁴Razia Sultana⁵Mathew Mutiso⁶Vishal Girishkumar Bhavsar^1*

• ¹King's College London, London, United Kingdom
• ²Uzima Ari, Kampala, Uganda
• ³Government Medical College (GMC), Srinagar, Jammu and Kashmir, India
• ⁴University of Ghana, Accra, Greater Accra, Ghana
• ⁵The University of Manchester, Manchester, England, United Kingdom
• ⁶Coalition for preventive mental health, Nairobi, Kenya

200) Background UN guidance discouraged direct enquiry about intimate partner and family violence (IPFV) during COVID-19, instead advocating proxy questions on subjects like relationship difficulties and perceived safety. We investigated the relationship between partner difficulties and family difficulties and common mental disorder (CMD), during COVID-19 in low, middle, and high-income countries.We carried out and analysed an online survey, measuring partner difficulties and family difficulties (as proxy items for IPFV), CMD, and socioeconomic risk factors.There were 409 respondents in 19 countries. The prevalence of CMD was 32.27%. After all adjustments, the risk ratio (RR) for the association of partner difficulties with CMD was 1.30(95%CI: 1.06,1.60). The adjusted RR of family difficulties with CMD was 1.18(95%CI: 0.97,1.44). Both partner and family difficulties were significantly associated with CMD in females (partner difficulties RR =1.31(95%CI: 1.05,1.65); family difficulties RR =1.37(95%CI:1.09,1.72)).Collecting proxy data on IPFV is feasible and was related to CMD during COVID-19 in a range of settings. As well as partner violence, family violence may also be related to greater CMD, especially in women. Policy responses for post-pandemic recovery and preparation for future emergencies should consider the health impacts of family violence as well as partner violence.