A Systematic Review of Interventions Addressing the Primary Prevention of Violence Against Women With Disability.

Women with disability experience significantly more violence and abuse than their nondisabled peers. Efforts to implement, evaluate, and scale-up strategies to prevent violence against women are rapidly expanding, but we know less about "what works" to prevent violence against women with disability. While secondary and tertiary prevention aim to identify violence early and prevent further occurrence, this review focuses on primary prevention. In the disability services sector, primary prevention is sometimes referred to as safeguarding and covers a range of activities that aim to address the underlying determinants of violence to prevent it from happening in the first place. The aim of this review is to identify and synthesize research on evaluated interventions addressing the primary prevention of violence against women with disability and explore evidence about their quality and effectiveness. A systematic search across the bibliographic databases of Medline, CINAHL, Embase, and PsychInfo for peer-reviewed literature published in English on or after January 1, 2010, yielded 483 papers of potential interest. Twelve studies met the inclusion criteria and were considered for review. Data were extracted and the quality of the studies was assessed using the Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies. Most studies reported outcomes from pre- and post-test research designs and received a weak rating of quality. Although interventions targeting awareness, knowledge, and skill development showed evidence of effectiveness, there is a distinct lack of program development that draws on known risk factors for violence such as the intersection of ableism and gender inequality.

Developing self-report disability questions for a voluntary patient registration form for general practice in Australia.

OBJECTIVE: This article reports on research undertaken to develop self-report disability questions for a patient registration form that may be implemented in general practices across Australia as part of a voluntary patient registration program. METHODS: There were four research components: rapid review of approaches for capturing disability information; expert informant interviews (n=19); stakeholder consultation via virtual focus groups (n=65); and online survey (n=35). Findings from each component informed development of materials for subsequent components in an iterative research process. RESULTS: Three disability questions were developed: two alternative questions for identifying disability, conceptually aligned with the operational definition of disability in Australia's national disability survey; one question to determine the patient's disability group/s. CONCLUSIONS: Knowledge and perspectives from a variety of sources informed the development of self-report questions to identify patients with disability. Implementing these questions represents an opportunity to test new ways of capturing disability information suited to mainstream service provision contexts. It will be essential to evaluate the quality of the data produced during the initial period of implementation. IMPLICATIONS FOR PUBLIC HEALTH: The collection of self-report patient disability information within general practice, using standard and conceptually-sound questions, has the potential to support improved provision of health care to patients with disability.

'Faceless monster, secret society': Women's experiences navigating the administrative burden of Australia's National Disability Insurance Scheme.

Previous research has indicated that administrative burdens are particularly high in personalised funding schemes such as the Australian National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS), because these schemes are predicated on very high levels of self-advocacy. Administrative burdens tend to be inequitably distributed, thereby entrenching existing social inequalities. This is the first study to look at the lived experiences of administrative burden within the NDIS explicitly-and particularly those of women, who are underrepresented within the scheme. The research involved qualitative interviews with 30 women with disability who were either NDIS participants or had considered applying for the NDIS. We argue that like other marginalised groups, women with disability are experiencing significant administrative burdens within the NDIS, which are barriers to obtaining sufficient disability support. Based on this finding, we recommend the NDIS implement a gender strategy, as well as address burdensome administrative processes in general.

Women's experiences of accessing individualized disability supports: gender inequality and Australia's National Disability Insurance Scheme.

BACKGROUND: Care services in industrialized nations are increasingly moving towards individualized funding models, which aim to increase individuals' flexibility, choice and control over their services and supports. Recent research suggests that such schemes have the potential to exacerbate inequalities, however none has explored gendered dimensions of inequality. The Australian National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) is a major individualized funding reform, and has a female participation rate of only 37%, despite women and girls making up half of the disability population. METHODS: The objective of the study is to explore possible gendered barriers to applying for and receiving adequate support through the NDIS, and to suggest directions for future research. We report on semi-structured interviews with 30 women with disability and explore their experiences with the NDIS and their perspectives on challenges associated with being a woman seeking disability support in Australia. We analyse the results using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Most women in our sample reported differences between the experiences of men and women seeking disability support in Australia. Commonly reported gendered barriers to women being able to access the right supports for their disability involve a) confidence, negotiation and self-advocacy, b) gendered discrimination in diagnosis and the medical system, which has implications for disability support access, and c) support for and recognition of caring roles. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that women are not receiving equitable treatment with regard to the NDIS, and that further research and policy reform are needed to ensure that women with disability are not further disadvantaged as a result of the move toward individualized funding models.