» Articles » PMID: 25708504

How Does Intimate Partner Violence Affect Condom and Oral Contraceptive Use in the United States?: A Systematic Review of the Literature

Overview
Journal Contraception
Publisher Elsevier
Date 2015 Feb 25
PMID 25708504
Citations 49
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Introduction: Intimate partner violence (IPV) is estimated to affect 25% of adult women in the United States alone. IPV directly impacts women's ability to use contraception, resulting in many of unintended pregnancies and STIs. This review examines the relationship between IPV and condom and oral contraceptive use within the United States at two levels: the female victim's perspective on barriers to condom and oral contraceptive use, in conjunction with experiencing IPV (Aim 1) and the male perpetrator's perspective regarding condom and oral contraceptive use (Aim 2).

Study Design: We systematically reviewed and synthesized all publications meeting the study criteria published since 1997. We aimed to categorize the results by emerging themes related to each study aim.

Results: We identified 42 studies that met our inclusion criteria. We found 37 studies that addressed Aim 1. Within this we identified three themes: violence resulting in reduced condom or oral contraceptive use (n=15); condom or oral contraceptive use negotiation (n=15); which we further categorized as IPV due to condom or oral contraceptive request, perceived violence (or fear) of IPV resulting in decreased condom or oral contraceptive use, and sexual relationship power imbalances decreasing the ability to use condoms or oral contraceptives; and reproductive coercion (n=7). We found 5 studies that addressed Aim 2. Most studies were cross-sectional, limiting the ability to determine causality between IPV and condom or oral contraceptive use; however, most studies did find a positive relationship between IPV and decreased condom or oral contraceptive use.

Conclusions: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods research has demonstrated the linkages between female IPV victimization/male IPV perpetration and condom or oral contraceptive use. However, additional qualitative and longitudinal research is needed to improve the understanding of dynamics in relationships with IPV and determine causality between IPV, intermediate variables (e.g., contraceptive use negotiation, sexual relationship power dynamics, reproductive coercion), and condom and oral contraceptive use. Assessing the relationship between IPV and reproductive coercion may elucidate barriers to contraceptive use as well as opportunities for interventions to increase contraceptive use (such as forms of contraception with less partner influence) and reduce IPV and reproductive coercion.

Citing Articles

Community-level influences on women's experience of intimate partner violence and modern contraceptive use in Nigeria: a multilevel analysis of nationally representative survey.

Adedini S, Adewole O, Oyinlola F, Fayehun O AAS Open Res. 2025; 4:37.

PMID: 40078891 PMC: 11077618. DOI: 10.12688/aasopenres.13247.2.


The intersection of intimate partner violence with sexual reproductive health in the Pacific: findings from a Kiribati population study.

Spiteri-Staines A, Gomez L, Letch J, Bornemisza A, Diemer K BMC Womens Health. 2025; 25(1):52.

PMID: 39910540 PMC: 11796009. DOI: 10.1186/s12905-024-03484-3.


Sexual choking/strangulation and its association with condom and contraceptive use: Findings from a survey of students at a university in the Midwestern United States.

Herbenick D, Fu T, Perry C, Guerra-Reyes L, Eastman-Mueller H, Svetina Valdivia D Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2024; 56(4):358-367.

PMID: 39327226 PMC: 11646831. DOI: 10.1111/psrh.12285.


Investigating the Impact of Reproductive Coercion and Intimate Partner Violence on Psychological and Sexual Wellbeing.

Sheeran N, Jenkins A, Humphreys T, Ter Horst S, Higgins M J Interpers Violence. 2024; 40(3-4):726-755.

PMID: 38752449 PMC: 11673295. DOI: 10.1177/08862605241253026.


Development of a risk estimation model for condomless sex among college students in Zhuhai, China: a cross-sectional study.

Huang Y, Zhou Y, Hong Y, Dai W, Lin K, Liu Y BMC Public Health. 2024; 24(1):742.

PMID: 38459535 PMC: 10921646. DOI: 10.1186/s12889-024-18183-9.


References
1.
Mittal M, Stockman J, Seplaki C, Thevenet-Morrison K, Guido J, Carey M . HIV risk among women from domestic violence agencies: prevalence and correlates. J Assoc Nurses AIDS Care. 2013; 24(4):322-30. PMC: 3986460. DOI: 10.1016/j.jana.2012.11.009. View

2.
East L, Jackson D, OBrien L, Peters K . Condom negotiation: experiences of sexually active young women. J Adv Nurs. 2010; 67(1):77-85. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2010.05451.x. View

3.
Miller E, Levenson R, Herrera L, Kurek L, Stofflet M, Marin L . Exposure to partner, family, and community violence: gang-affiliated Latina women and risk of unintended pregnancy. J Urban Health. 2011; 89(1):74-86. PMC: 3284591. DOI: 10.1007/s11524-011-9631-0. View

4.
Williams C, Larsen U, McCloskey L . Intimate partner violence and women's contraceptive use. Violence Against Women. 2008; 14(12):1382-96. DOI: 10.1177/1077801208325187. View

5.
Scribano P, Stevens J, Kaizar E . The effects of intimate partner violence before, during, and after pregnancy in nurse visited first time mothers. Matern Child Health J. 2012; 17(2):307-18. DOI: 10.1007/s10995-012-0986-y. View