Background Healthcare practitioners (HCPs) play a crucial role in recognising, responding to, and supporting female patients experiencing intimate partner abuse (IPA). However, research consistently identifies barriers they perceive prevent them from doing this work effectively. These barriers can be system-based (e.g. lack of time or training) or personal/individual. This review of qualitative evidence aims to synthesise the personal barriers that impact HCPs’ responses to IPA. Methods Five databases were searched in March 2020. Studies needed to utilise qualitative methods for both data collection and analysis and be published between 2010 and 2020 in order to qualify for inclusion; however, we considered any type of healthcare setting in any country. Article screening, data extraction and methodological appraisal using a modified version of the Critical Appraisal Skills Program checklist for qualitative studies were undertaken by at least two independent reviewers. Data analysis drew on Thomas and Harden’s thematic synthesis approach. Results Twenty-nine studies conducted in 20 countries informed the final review. A variety of HCPs and settings were represented. Three themes were developed that describe the personal barriers experienced by HCPs: I can’t interfere (which describes the belief that IPA is a “private matter” and HCPs’ fears of causing harm by intervening); I don’t have control (highlighting HCPs’ frustration when women do not follow their advice); and I won’t take responsibility (which illuminates beliefs that addressing IPA should be someone else’s job). Conclusion This review highlights the need for training to address personal issues in addition to structural or organisational barriers. Education and training for HCPs needs to: encourage reflection on their own values to reinforce their commitment to addressing IPA; teach HCPs to relinquish the need to control outcomes so that they can adopt an advocacy approach; and support HCPs’ trust in the critical role they can play in responding. Future research should explore effective ways to do this within the context of complex healthcare organisations.

Background Health care practitioners (HCPs) play a critical role in identifying and responding to intimate partner abuse (IPA). Despite this, studies consistently demonstrate a range of barriers that prevent HCPs from effectively identifying and responding to IPA. These barriers can occur at the individual level or at a broader systems or organisational level. In this article, we report the findings of a meta-synthesis of qualitative studies focused on HCPs’ perceptions of the structural or organisational barriers to IPA identification. Methods Seven databases were searched to identify English-language studies published between 2012 and 2020 that used qualitative methods to explore the perspectives of HCPs in relation to structural or organisational barriers to identifying IPA. Two reviewers independently screened the articles. Findings from the included studies were analysed using Thomas and Hardin’s method of using a thematic synthesis and critiqued using the Critical Appraisal Skills Program tool for qualitative studies and the methodological component of the GRADE-CERQual. Results Forty-three studies conducted in 22 countries informed the review. Eleven HCP settings were represented. Three themes were developed that described the structural barriers experienced by HCPs: The environment works against us (limited time with patients, lack of privacy); Trying to tackle the problem on my own (lack of management support and a health system that fails to provide adequate training, policies and response protocols and resources), Societal beliefs enable us to blame the victim (normalisation of IPA, only presents in certain types of women, women will lie or are not reliable). Conclusion This meta-synthesis highlights the need for structural change to address these barriers. These include changing health systems to enable more time and to improve privacy, training, policies, and referral protocols. On a broader level IPA in health systems is currently not seen as a priority in terms of global burden of disease, mortality and morbidity and community attitudes need to address blaming the victim.

Family violence (FV) is a universal public health problem in South Asia with negative-health outcomes for South Asian women. Health care providers (HCPs) play a pivotal role in identifying and supporting women experiencing FV, but little is known about their experiences with South Asian women. A systematic review was conducted to explore and address health care providers’ views on identification and response to South Asian women experiencing FV. Nine online databases, reference lists were searched, and a priori inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied independently by two reviewers. A meta-synthesis approach was utilized to integrate findings from qualitative studies. Eight studies involving 250 participants met the inclusion criteria. Studies were published between 2007 and 2020 within South Asian countries (Pakistan, India, and Sri Lanka) and one study from the USA and UK. The meta-synthesis identified three themes: Context of societal norms and attitudes towards women in South Asia; Influence of family honor, Privacy and shame; and Concern about health care provider’s personal safety. Findings revealed that FV is often perceived as a normal routine issue and is considered a “private issue” in South Asian society. Family honor and values play a pivotal role in silencing women experiencing FV as disclosure is considered shameful and disgrace to family honor. Furthermore, health care providers avoid intervening in FV cases due to risk for their personal safety. Finally, this review provides the evidence to support a specific framework for FV interventions among south Asian women for policy makers and practitioners.

Sexual violence (SV) against women is common in higher education settings, causing serious harm to the health, well-being, and academic outcomes of victim/survivors. There have been numerous systematic reviews of the quantitative evidence on this topic, highlighting the prevalence, health impacts, and barriers and facilitators to help-seeking after SV. To date, however, qualitative research exploring the lived experience of women higher education students has not been synthesized. This scoping review and thematic synthesis of qualitative studies aims to map the global evidence on women higher education students’ experiences of SV and explore how they understand and make sense of their experiences. We searched five databases (CinAHL, Academic Search Complete, Medline, PsychInfo, and SocIndex) in January 2023 for relevant articles. Eligible articles needed to be published in English and describe qualitative or mixed-methods primary research on the lived experiences of women higher education students who were victim/survivors of SV. In all, 34 articles describing 32 studies met these inclusion criteria. Thematic analysis of data extracted from the included studies suggests that, for women higher education students, the experience of SV is characterized by profound shame, with often-irreversible impacts on hopes and plans for the future. Yet, at the same time, SV is normalized and expected as a part of the “student experience.” Furthermore, an imagined “specter” of “real violence” is held up as a constant comparison that serves to minimize and trivialize their experiences. These findings have important implications for higher education providers seeking to improve programs to address SV.

Introduction: Given the high prevalence of family violence (FV) amongst South Asian women, the experiences and expectations of addressing FV in health care settings is of policy, practice and research interest. Whilst FV is shaped and influenced by various interconnected sociodemographic and cultural factors, it can be addressed in health care settings through identification and response. Methods: This review utilized a systematic methodology to search nine databases up to July 2022. A total of 6,685 records were screened by two reviewers independently based on a priori inclusion and exclusion criteria. A thematic analytical approach guided integration of findings from thirteen qualitative studies. Results: Thematic synthesis of the articles generated three themes (1) I was afraid to share, (2) They just walk away, (3) Understand and listen to my pain. These themes represented the perspectives, feelings, and expectations of South Asian women survivor participants living in South Asia as well as migrant South Asian women. Cultural factors and social obstacles may prevent South Asian women from seeking and using appropriate support services. Additional barriers may include health care providers’ reluctance to address FV with South Asian women because of a lack of cultural knowledge and/or appropriate methods to address FV. South Asian women participants reflected they want health care providers to understand them, acknowledge their discomfort, and provide culturally appropriate strategies and solutions. Conclusion: It is highly recommended that policymakers and health-care providers continue to be mindful of the social and cultural challenges which face South Asian women who experience family violence.