No abstract

Background and Objective: Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a clinical and social problem globally, especially in the Middle East. This study aimed to analyze the prevalence of IPV and its types against women in the Middle East region. Method: PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched in January 2020. From 1995 to 2020, all studies performed in the Middle East, investigating at least one type of abuse against women and written in English, entered the study. All included studies were appraised using Joanna Briggs Institute Checklist, which was adapted for prevalence studies. The random effect model of meta-analysis was performed using the Mantel–Haenszel method by comprehensive meta-analysis software. Each type of abuse as event rate with 95% CI was calculated for each variable. Heterogeneity was investigated using the I 2 statistic test. Results: Fifty-five studies encompassing 138,692 participants were included in our meta-analysis. The rate of overall abuse was 26.3 ( n = 55, 95% CI: [15.8, 40.5], p = .002). The highest rate of abuse in the included studies was reported for psychological abuse 48.6% ( n = 46, 95% CI: [39.8, 57.5], p = .758). The rate of abuse for physical, economical, sexual, and injury were 28.4% ( n = 53, 95% CI: [22.1, 35.7], p = .0001), 19% ( n = 10, 95% CI: [9.8, 33.7], p = .0001), 18.5% ( n = 45, 95% CI: [13.6, 24.6], p = .0001), and 18.4% ( n = 5, 95% CI: [7.1, 40.2], p = 0.008), respectively. The overall abuse reported by World Health Organization Multi-Country Domestic Violence (DV)Questionnaire was 25.7% ( n = 17, 95% CI: [18.4, 34.7], p = .0001). This value was 41.8% ( n = 11, 95% CI: [29.7, 55], p = .223) for the Conflict Tactics Scale Questionnaire. Conclusion: Although this review highlights the lack of or insufficient IPV data in some contexts and inconsistencies in defining and measuring IPV among studies, the evidence shows that a moderate to high pattern of abuse has been observed in the study population. Due to this region’s unique cultural-religious characteristics, it is urgent to reduce this phenomenon.

‫ﺷﺮﻓﻲ‬ ‫ﺳﻴﻤﻴﻦ‬

The quality of care in patient's view lacks the optimal and desired level in hospital wards with respect to psychosocial dimension. Moreover, there is a direct relationship between the methods of the division labor of nurses and the quality of patient care.Objective: This study aimed to compare the primary nursing method and case method on the psychosocial dimension of the quality of patient care in Coronary Care Units (CCU). Materials and Methods:This is a experimental study conducted on 60 patients in two groups at 4 CCUs of Educational Centers in Mashhad City, Iran in 2014. After performing these two methods, the quality of patient care with respect to psychosocial dimensions were assessed by the interview method using the quality of patient care questionnaire. Finally, the results were analyzed using the Independent t test, Mann-Whitney and Chisquare tests. Results:The mean age of patients was 56.4±13.7 years and the mean age of nurses was 37.4±4.4 years. The mean score of individual psychosocial dimension was 41.7±7.1 for the primary nursing method group and 27.6±8.9 for the case method group. Also the mean score of group psychosocial dimension for the quality of care in primary nursing method 17.3±5.7 and case method 12.3±7.6 groups using Independent t test showed a significant difference between the two groups, i.e. the quality of both individual and group psychosocial dimensions in the primary group were significantly higher (P=0.0001). Conclusion:It seems that the implementation of primary nursing method can partly improve the quality of care in individual and group psychosocial dimensions.

No abstract