SAFETYLIT WEEKLY UPDATE

We compile citations and summaries of about 400 new articles every week.
RSS Feed

HELP: Tutorials | FAQ
CONTACT US: Contact info

Search Results

Journal Article

Citation

Olson RM, Garcia-Moreno C, Colombini M. BMJ Glob. Health 2020; 5(3): e001883.

Affiliation

Department of Global Health and Development, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2020, BMJ Publishing Group)

DOI

10.1136/bmjgh-2019-001883

PMID

32337076

PMCID

PMC7170420

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Many low- and middle-income countries have implemented health-system based one stop centres to respond to intimate partner violence (IPV) and sexual violence. Despite its growing popularity in low- and middle-income countries and among donors, no studies have systematically reviewed the one stop centre. Using a thematic synthesis approach, this systematic review aims to identify enablers and barriers to implementation of the one stop centre (OSC) model and to achieving its intended results for women survivors of violence in low- and middle-income countries.

METHODS: We searched PubMed, CINAHL and Embase databases and grey literature using a predetermined search strategy to identify all relevant qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods studies. Overall, 42 studies were included from 24 low- and middle-income countries. We used a three-stage thematic synthesis methodology to synthesise the qualitative evidence, and we used the CERQual (Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative Research) approach to assess confidence in the qualitative research. Meta-analysis could not be performed due heterogeneity in results and outcome measures. Quantitative data are presented by individual study characteristics and outcomes, and key findings are incorporated into the qualitative thematic framework.

RESULTS: The review found 15 barriers with high-confidence evidence and identified seven enablers with moderate-confidence evidence. These include barriers to implementation such as lack of multisectoral staff and private consultation space as well as barriers to achieving the intended result of multisectoral coordination due to fragmented services and unclear responsibilities of implementing partners. There were also differences between enablers and barriers of various OSC models such as the hospital-based OSC, the stand-alone OSC and the NGO-run OSC.

CONCLUSION: This review demonstrates that there are several barriers that have often prevented the OSC model from being implemented as designed and achieving the intended result of providing high quality, accessible, acceptable, multisectoral care. Existing OSCs will likely require strategic investment to address these specific barriers before they can achieve their ultimate goal of reducing survivor retraumatisation when seeking care. More rigorous and systematic evaluation of the OSC model is needed to better understand whether the OSC model of care is improving support for survivors of IPV and sexual violence.The systematic review protocol was registered and is available online (PROSPERO: CRD42018083988).

© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.


Language: en

Keywords

health services research; public health; systematic review

NEW SEARCH


All SafetyLit records are available for automatic download to Zotero & Mendeley
Print