BackgroundIntimate partner violence against women is a prevailing public health problem in Tanzania, where four of ten women have a lifetime exposure to physical or sexual violence by their male partners. To be able to suggest relevant and feasible community and health care based interventions, we explored community members' understanding and their responses to intimate partner violence.MethodsA qualitative study using focus group discussions with 75 men and women was conducted in a community setting of urban Tanzania. We analysed data using a grounded theory approach and relate our findings to the ecological framework of intimate partner violence.ResultsThe analysis resulted in one core category, "Moving from frustration to questioning traditional gender norms", that denoted a community in transition where the effects of intimate partner violence had started to fuel a wish for change. At the societal level, the category "Justified as part of male prestige" illustrates how masculinity prevails to justify violence. At the community level, the category "Viewed as discreditable and unfair" indicates community recognition of intimate partner violence as a human rights concern. At the relationship level, the category "Results in emotional entrapment" shows the shame and self-blame that is often the result of a violent relationship. At the individual level, the risk factors for intimate partner violence were primarily associated with male characteristics; the category "Fed up with passivity" emerged as an indication that community members also acknowledge their own responsibility for change in actions.ConclusionsPrevailing gender norms in Tanzania accept women's subordination and justify male violence towards women. At the individual level, an increasing openness makes it possible for women to report, ask for help, and become proactive in suggesting preventive measures. At the community level, there is an increased willingness to intervene but further consciousness-raising of the human rights perspective of violence, as well as actively engaging men. At the macro level, preventive efforts must be prioritized through re-enforcement of legal rights, and provision of adequate medical and social welfare services for both survivors and perpetrators.

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a public health problem in Tanzania with limited health care interventions.ObjectivesTo study the feasibility of using an abuse screening tool for women attending an outpatient department, and describe how health care workers perceived its benefits and challenges.MethodsPrior to screening, 39 health care workers attended training on gender-based violence and the suggested screening procedures. Seven health care workers were arranged to implement screening in 3 weeks, during March–April 2010. For screening evaluation, health care workers were observed for their interaction with clients. Thereafter, focus group discussions (FGDs) were conducted with 21 health care workers among those who had participated in the training and screening. Five health care workers wrote narratives. Women's responses to screening questions were analyzed with descriptive statistics, whereas qualitative content analysis guided analysis of qualitative data.ResultsOf the 102 women screened, 78% had experienced emotional, physical, or sexual violence. Among them, 62% had experienced IPV, while 22% were subjected to violence by a relative, and 9.2% by a work mate. Two-thirds (64%) had been abused more than once; 14% several times. Almost one-quarter (23%) had experienced sexual violence. Six of the health care workers interacted well with clients but three had difficulties to follow counseling guidelines. FGDs and narratives generated three categories Just asking feels good implied a blessing of the tool; what next? indicated ethical dilemmas; and fear of becoming a 'women hospital’ only indicated a concern that abused men would be neglected.ConclusionsScreening for IPV is feasible. Overall, the health care workers perceived the tool to be advantageous. Training on gender-based violence and adjustment of the tool to suit local structures are important. Further studies are needed to explore the implications of including abuse against men and children in future screening.

In this article we describe health care workers' (HCWs') experiences and perceptions of meeting clients exposed to intimate partner violence (IPV). Qualitative content analysis of in-depth interviews from 16 informants resulted in four main themes. The first, "internalizing women's suffering and powerlessness," describes HCWs' perceptions of violence, relating it to gender relations. The second, "caught between encouraging disclosure and lack of support tools," refers to views on possibilities for transparency and openness. The third, "Why bother? A struggle to manage with limited resources," illustrates the consequences of a heavy workload. Last; "striving to make a difference," emphasizes a desire to improve abilities to support clients and advocate for prevention.

Introduction The World Health Organization’s (WHO) Labour Care Guide (LCG) is a “next‐generation” partograph based on WHO’s latest intrapartum care recommendations. It aims to optimize clinical care provided to women and their experience of care. We evaluated the LCG’s usability, feasibility, and acceptability among maternity care practitioners in clinical settings. Methods Mixed‐methods evaluation with doctors, midwives, and nurses in 12 health facilities across Argentina, India, Kenya, Malawi, Nigeria, and Tanzania. Purposively sampled and trained practitioners applied the LCG in low‐risk women during labor and rated experiences, satisfaction, and usability. Practitioners were invited to focus group discussions (FGDs) to share experiences and perceptions of the LCG, which were subjected to framework analysis. Results One hundred and thirty‐six practitioners applied the LCG in managing labor and birth of 1,226 low‐risk women. The majority of women had a spontaneous vaginal birth (91.6%); two cases of intrapartum stillbirths (1.63 per 1000 births) occurred. Practitioner satisfaction with the LCG was high, and median usability score was 67.5%. Practitioners described the LCG as supporting precise and meticulous monitoring during labor, encouraging critical thinking in labor management, and improving the provision of woman‐centered care. Conclusions The LCG is feasible and acceptable to use across different clinical settings and can promote woman‐centered care, though some design improvements would benefit usability. Implementing the LCG needs to be accompanied by training and supportive supervision, and strategies to promote an enabling environment (including updated policies on supportive care interventions, and ensuring essential equipment is available).

This paper presents the findings of a multi-centre study assessing the impact of Health Workers for Change (HWFC) workshops in seven different primary care sites, based on the common core protocol described in this paper. The paper discusses a common methodology used by the studies, consisting of a triangulation of qualitative and quantitative methods. Such methodologies are inherently complex as they require comparisons across systems, sites and procedures. The studies were conducted in six sites in Africa and one site in Argentina. Generally, the intervention resulted either in positive change or in no change, except in the area of staff relationships where conflicts were more frequent after the intervention than before. This may reflect a willingness to confront problems or contentious issues. Implementing the HWFC workshops improved provider-client relations, facility level functioning and aspects of staff interrelationships, and had some impact at the system level. All studies indicated that overall health system development is essential for improved service provision including quality of care. The findings also indicated that this intervention complemented and could assist health sector reform efforts and can play a role in sensitizing health workers to gender issues. The paper concludes with a discussion of the robustness of the methodology used in the studies.