Table 3.

Multivariate logistic regression of client-perpetrated sexual violence and alcohol use among FSWs¹, ² (N=983)

	Sexual advantages taken by clients	Demand for extra service	Being raped or sexually assaulted	Clothes being stripped off by clients	Coerced sex	Coerced sex by violence	Purposely injuring genitals
	aOR (95% CI)	aOR (95% CI)	aOR (95% CI)	aOR (95% CI)	aOR (95% CI)	aOR (95% CI)	aOR (95% CI)
Risk of Alcohol use3
Level 1: low risk	Reference	Reference	Reference	Reference	Reference	Reference	Reference
Level 2: risk drinking	2.19 (1.49, 3.23)****	1.23 (0.84, 1.80)	0.89 (0.39, 2.02)	1.51 (0.52, 4.40)	1.58 (0.88, 2.86)	0.71 (0.21, 2.47)	2.47 (0.85, 7.16)
Level 3: heavy drinking	2.49 (1.47,4.21)***	2.11 (1.28, 3.46)***	2.58 (1.10, 6.05)*	3.44 (1.10, 10.76)*	2..07 (1.00, 4.29)	1.78 (0.49, 6.46)	4.71 (1.31,16.99)*
Level 4: hazardous drinking	5.31 (2.56, 11.01)****	3.54 (1.93, 6.50)****	3.57 (1.46, 8.72)**	3.79 (1.15, 12.52)*	2.27 (1.00, 5.18)	1.29 (0.27, 6.14)	1.38 (0.15,12.82)
Age	0.95 (0.91,0.99)*	0.98 (0.95, 1.02)	1.01 (0.94, 1.08)	1.00 (0.92, 1.10)	0.96 (0.91, 1.02)	0.94 (0.83, 1.05)	1.01 (0.91, 1.12)
Education
Illiterate	Reference	Reference	Reference	Reference	Reference	Reference	Reference
Elementary	1.13 (0.23,5.50)	0.57 (0.12, 2.67)	0.96 (0.07, 13.17)	0.05 (0.00, 1.13)	0.22 (0.04, 1.33)	0.18 (0.01, 2.32)	0.14 (0.02, 1.33)
Middle school	1.99 (0.45,8.82)	0.81 (0.19, 3.42)	1.02 (0.09, 12.20)	0.17 (0.02, 1.67)	0.26 (0.05, 1.32)	0.18 (0.02, 1.53)	0.04 (0.01, 0.30)***
High school	1.83 (0.41,8.19)	0.94 (0.22, 4.03)	1.11 (0.09, 13.65)	0.34 (0.04, 3.30)	0.31 (0.06, 1.57)	0.16 (0.02, 1.52)	0.06 (0.01, 0.45)**
College or above	0.99 (0.18,5.55)	0.68 (0.13, 3.62)	0.50 (0.02, 12.38)	n/a	0.26 (0.03, 1.97)	n/a	0.09 (0.01, 1.52)
Marital status
Never married	Reference	Reference	Reference	Reference	Reference	Reference	Reference
Cohabit but not married	1.20 (0.79,1.82)	1.34 (0.91, 1.97)	0.65 (0.30, 1.40)	0.89 (0.37, 2.14)	1.93 (1.18, 3.15)**	0.53 (0.15, 1.84)	2.04 (0.82, 5.05)
Married	1.13 (0.66,1.94)	1.03 (0.62, 1.73)	0.78 (0.31, 1.96)	1.31 (0.43, 3.98)	1.12 (0.53, 2.38)	0.31 (0.05, 2.13)	0.26 (0.04, 1.61)
Separate	0.81 (0.34,1.91)	0.75 (0.32, 1.76)	1.09 (0.30, 3.94)	1.73 (0.35, 8.62)	2.71 (0.95, 7.72)	0.74 (0.08, 6.69)	0.42 (0.04, 4.95)
Divorce/widow	1.00 (0.49,2.05)	0.77 (0.38, 1.57)	0.82 (0.25,2.71)	0.38 (0.04, 3.47)	3.09 (1.27, 7.54)*	0.60 (0.07, 5.55)	n/a
Working venues
Mini hotel	Reference	Reference	Reference	Reference	Reference	Reference	Reference
Streets	0.77 (0.05,10.93)	0.98 (0.07, 13.85)	0.41 (0.02, 7.99)	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a
Massage parlor	1.93 (0.34, 10.92)	1.73 (0.29, 10.20)	0.42 (0.04, 4.09)	n/a	0.11 (0.01, 0.94)*	2.94 (0.07,133.23)	n/a
Hair salon	0.60 (1.00, 3.75)	1.11 (0.17, 7.14)	0.28 (0.02, 3.44)	n/a	0.14 (0.02, 1.36)	0.45 (0.01, 24.27)	n/a
Bar	1.52 (0.24, 9.74)	3.29 (0.51, 21.12)	0.22 (0.01, 4.17)	n/a	0.11 (0.01, 1.38)	0.41 (0.01, 26.30)	n/a
Night club	0.56 (0.09, 3.69)	1.29 (0.21, 8.02)	0.06 (0.00, 1.10)	n/a	0.06 (0.00, 1.10)	n/a	n/a
Karaoke	1.42 (0.22, 9.29)	1.97 (0.33, 11.75)	0.30 (0.03, 2.80)	n/a	0.17 (0.01,1.93)	n/a	n/a
Sauna	0.54 (0.11, 2.81)	1.04 (0.20, 5.38)	0.14 (0.02, 1.11)	n/a	0.21 (0.03, 1.58)	0.25 (0.01,7.21)	n/a
Alcohol serving practice in venues	6.91(4.54, 10.53)***	5.65 (3.65, 8.75)****	2.38 (0.92, 6.19)	n/a	0.43 (0.24, 0.79)**	4.66 (0.19, 115.38)	n/a4
Goodness-of-fit (Chi-Square)	3.60	4.25	3.59	3.65	2.82	2.22	13.38

¹Notes: Random effect model, justifying intra-class correlation within each venue due to cluster sampling.

²All variables in the table were included in all models.

³Risk levels of alcohol use: level one refers to “low risk” with the AUDIT scores from “0-7”, level two refers to “risk drinking” with the AUDIT scores from “8-15”, level three refers to “heavy drinking” with the AUDIT scores between “16-19”, and level four refers to “hazardous drinking” with the AUDIT scores from “20-40”.

⁴N/A: no meaningful results are available.

^*p<.05,

^**p<.01,

^***p<.005,

^****p<.0001