Partner Violence In Health Care Settings Research Articles

Partner violence in healthcare settings on breastfeeding mothers: a scientometric analysis

Background Partner violence is a significant issue affecting women’s health, particularly their breastfeeding practices in healthcare settings. Despite a considerable body of research on this topic, there is a need for a systematic overview of the existing literature to explore its thematic and structural developments. Methods This scientometric analysis covers a period of 45 years (1977-2022) and identifies 415 peer-reviewed articles published in English before 2023 from the Scopus database. The articles were included if they engaged with themes related to partner violence, healthcare settings, breastfeeding, and mothers, using predefined search terms and filters. Bibliometric data were decoded and visualized using VOSviewer and RStudio to analyze and visualize the scientific dialogue, trends, patterns, and networks in the literature regarding partner violence and its impact on breastfeeding mothers in healthcare settings. Results The study revealed a concentrated exploration of themes related to violence, healthcare provision, mental health, and women’s reproductive health. The co-occurrence network and thematic mapping illuminated seven pivotal clusters, revealing a complex narrative of interconnected research areas. Niche and emerging themes such as “Depression,” “HIV,” and “Covid-19” were identified, highlighting the evolving landscape of the research domain. Conclusions This analysis provides a panoramic overview of the existing literature, revealing intricate thematic structures and collaboration networks within the research on partner violence and breastfeeding mothers in healthcare settings. The study not only sheds light on the historical and current states of research but also pinpoints potential future directions, thereby assisting scholars and policymakers in navigating and prioritizing subsequent investigative endeavors.

Strategies for Identification of Intimate Partner Violence in Healthcare Settings: Overview of Reviews and Realist Synthesis

Strategies for Identification of Intimate Partner Violence in Healthcare Settings: Overview of Reviews and Realist Synthesis

Building a community-academic partnership to improve screening for intimate partner violence: Integrating advocates in healthcare clinic settings.

To develop an innovative community-academic partnership to advance, test and promote intimate partner violence screening and referral protocols by comparing the effect of integrating intimate partner violence advocates versus enhancing medical training in medical clinic settings serving women from vulnerable populations. Detecting intimate partner violence in healthcare settings allows for survivors to connect to safety and referral resources prior to violence escalating. Screening for intimate partner violence and connecting patients to referral resources requires creating a safe and trusting relationship between healthcare providers and patients. Developing screening and referral protocols responsive to survivors' needs requires involvement of clinic staff, survivors and community agencies that support survivors. Three phases of the project include Discovery, Implementation and Dissemination. Mixed-methodology will help in understanding current practices and effects of interventions. Actions included in each phase: Discovery: 1) nurse-led focus groups of clinic staff, providers and survivors to understand current clinic practices; 2) retrospective chart review of the number of screens performed, positive screens detected and interventions performed. 1) randomization of patients to be interviewed by a trained advocate or by healthcare provider with enhanced training; and 2) assess the number of screenings and referrals performed in each arm and 3) evaluate outcomes of intervention. Dissemination through: presentations, manuscripts and policy recommendations at the institutional and regional level. This IRB-approved proposal was funded in July 2021 by an Advancing a Healthier Wisconsin grant. The partnership has improved channels of communication and understanding between diverse clinical care providers, survivors and community agency staff as they navigate the complex challenges to the development and integration of screening and referral protocols. This project will provide evidence of the most effective intimate partner violence screening and referral methodology that can be utilized in a wide variety of medical settings.

Screening for intimate partner violence in healthcare settings: An implementation-oriented systematic review.

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a population health problem affecting millions of women worldwide. Screening for IPV within healthcare settings can identify women who experience IPV and inform counseling, referrals, and interventions to improve their health outcomes. Unfortunately, many screening programs used to detect IPV have only been tested in research contexts featuring externally funded study staff and resources. This systematic review therefore investigated the utility of IPV screening administered by frontline clinical personnel. We conducted a systematic literature review focusing on studies of IPV screening programs for women delivered by frontline healthcare staff. We based our data synthesis on two widely used implementation models (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance [RE-AIM] and Proctor's dimensions of implementation effectiveness). We extracted data from 59 qualifying studies. Based on data extraction guided by the RE-AIM framework, the median reach of the IPV screening programs was high (80%), but Emergency Department (ED) settings were found to have a much lower reach (47%). The median screen positive rate was 11%, which is comparable to the screen-positive rate found in studies using externally funded research staff. Among those screening positive, a median of 32% received a referral to follow-up services. Based on data extraction guided by Proctor's dimension of appropriateness, a lack of available referral services frustrated some efforts to implement IPV screening. Among studies reporting data on maintenance or sustainability of IPV screening programs, only half concluded that IPV screening rates held steady during the maintenance phase. Other domains of the RE-AIM and Proctor frameworks (e.g., implementation fidelity and costs) were reported less frequently. IPV is a population health issue, and successfully implementing IPV screening programs may be part of the solution. Our review emphasizes the importance of ongoing provider trainings, readily available referral sources, and consistent institutional support in maintaining appropriate IPV screening programs. Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a population health problem affecting millions of women worldwide. IPV screening and response can identify women who experience IPV and can inform interventions to improve their health outcomes. Unfortunately, many of the screening programs used to detect IPV have only been tested in research contexts featuring administration by externally funded study staff. This systematic review of IPV screening programs for women is particularly novel, as previous reviews have not focused on clinical implementation. It provides a better understanding of successful ways of implementing IPV screening and response practices with frontline clinical personnel in the context of routine care. Successfully implementing IPV screening programs may help mitigate the harms resulting from IPV against women. Findings from this review can inform future efforts to improve implementation of IPV screening programs in clinical settings to ensure that the victims of IPV have access to appropriate counseling, resources, and referrals.

The Impact of Intimate Partner Violence on the Mental Health of Pregnant Women Residing in Slum Areas: A Cross-Sectional Study

Intimate partner violence is one of the most common types of violence, and the association between intimate partner violence and mental health has serious implications for public health. This article aimed at investigating the impact of IPV on the mental health of pregnant women who reside in slum areas. A group of 456 women living in slum areas was investigated. The Conflict Tactics Scale was used to measure the respondent’s experience of different types of IPV during the past year. General Health Questionnaire-28 was used to measure the likelihood that an individual had a psychiatric disorder. A total of 456 pregnant women aged ≥ 20 years were interviewed using a shortened version of the Conflict Tactics Scale and the General Health Questionnaire. All types of intimate partner violence were found to be associated with various mental health problems (p < 0.05). Overall, physical (AOR: 3.61; 95% CI 2.11–6.17) and sexual (AOR: 1.72; 95% CI 1.01–2.94) violence increased the odds of probable psychiatric disorders in victims compared with their counterparts who had not experienced such types of violence. Further research is needed on the relationship between intimate partner violence and other mental health problems, protocols to screen for intimate partner violence in healthcare settings, and supportive services.

Screening and receiving information for intimate partner violence in healthcare settings: a cross-sectional study of Arab and Jewish women of childbearing age in Israel

ObjectivesWe studied the proportion of women who have ever been screened (ES) for intimate partner violence (IPV) in a healthcare setting, received information (RI) about relevant services, or both, and...

Cochrane in CORR (®): Screening Women for Intimate Partner Violence in Healthcare Settings (Review).

Cochrane in CORR (®): Screening Women for Intimate Partner Violence in Healthcare Settings (Review).

ACP Journal Club: review: screening identifies women having intimate partner violence but effects are unclear.

Source Citation O’Doherty L, Hegarty K, Ramsay J, et al. Screening women for intimate partner violence in healthcare settings. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;7:CD007007. 26200817

Screening women for intimate partner violence in healthcare settings.

Intimate partner violence (IPV) damages individuals, their children, communities, and the wider economic and social fabric of society. Some governments and professional organisations recommend screening all women for IPV rather than asking only women with symptoms (case-finding). Here, we examine the evidence for whether screening benefits women and has no deleterious effects. To assess the effectiveness of screening for IPV conducted within healthcare settings on identification, referral, re-exposure to violence, and health outcomes for women, and to determine if screening causes any harm. On 17 February 2015, we searched CENTRAL, Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, six other databases, and two trial registers. We also searched the reference lists of included articles and the websites of relevant organisations. Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials assessing the effectiveness of IPV screening where healthcare professionals either directly screened women face-to-face or were informed of the results of screening questionnaires, as compared with usual care (which could include screening that did not involve a healthcare professional). Two authors independently assessed the risk of bias in the trials and undertook data extraction. For binary outcomes, we calculated a standardised estimation of the odds ratio (OR). For continuous data, either a mean difference (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD) was calculated. All are presented with a 95% confidence interval (CI). We included 13 trials that recruited 14,959 women from diverse healthcare settings (antenatal clinics, women's health clinics, emergency departments, primary care) predominantly located in high-income countries and urban settings. The majority of studies minimised selection bias; performance bias was the greatest threat to validity. The overall quality of the body of evidence was low to moderate, mainly due to heterogeneity, risk of bias, and imprecision.We excluded five of 13 studies from the primary analysis as they either did not report identification data, or the way in which they did was not consistent with clinical identification by healthcare providers. In the remaining eight studies (n = 10,074), screening increased clinical identification of victims/survivors (OR 2.95, 95% CI 1.79 to 4.87, moderate quality evidence).Subgroup analyses suggested increases in identification in antenatal care (OR 4.53, 95% CI 1.82 to 11.27, two studies, n = 663, moderate quality evidence); maternal health services (OR 2.36, 95% CI 1.14 to 4.87, one study, n = 829, moderate quality evidence); and emergency departments (OR 2.72, 95% CI 1.03 to 7.19, three studies, n = 2608, moderate quality evidence); but not in hospital-based primary care (OR 1.53, 95% CI 0.79 to 2.94, one study, n = 293, moderate quality evidence).Only two studies (n = 1298) measured referrals to domestic violence support services following clinical identification. We detected no evidence of an effect on referrals (OR 2.24, 95% CI 0.64 to 7.86, low quality evidence).Four of 13 studies (n = 2765) investigated prevalence (excluded from main analysis as rates were not clinically recorded); detection of IPV did not differ between face-to-face screening and computer/written-based assessment (OR 1.12, 95% CI 0.53 to 2.36, moderate quality evidence).Only two studies measured women's experience of violence (three to 18 months after screening) and found no evidence that screening decreased IPV.Only one study reported on women's health with no differences observable at 18 months.Although no study reported adverse effects from screening interventions, harm outcomes were only measured immediately afterwards and only one study reported outcomes at three months.There was insufficient evidence on which to judge whether screening increases uptake of specialist services, and no studies included an economic evaluation. The evidence shows that screening increases the identification of women experiencing IPV in healthcare settings. Overall, however, rates were low relative to best estimates of prevalence of IPV in women seeking healthcare. Pregnant women in antenatal settings may be more likely to disclose IPV when screened, however, rigorous research is needed to confirm this. There was no evidence of an effect for other outcomes (referral, re-exposure to violence, health measures, lack of harm arising from screening). Thus, while screening increases identification, there is insufficient evidence to justify screening in healthcare settings. Furthermore, there remains a need for studies comparing universal screening to case-finding (with or without advocacy or therapeutic interventions) for women's long-term wellbeing in order to inform IPV identification policies in healthcare settings.

Screening and intervention for intimate partner violence in healthcare settings: creating sustainable system-level programs.

Among the barriers to routine screening for intimate partner violence (IPV) are time constraints, a lack of protocols and policies, and departmental philosophies of care that may conflict with IPV screening recommendations. To address these barriers, systems-level interventions are needed; in this article, we describe one model that may overcome these obstacles. We discuss how this systemic approach may best be implemented in both out-patient clinics and emergency departments (EDs) and note that evidence for its success will be required.

Screening women for intimate partner violence in healthcare settings: abridged Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective To examine the effectiveness of screening for intimate partner violence conducted within healthcare settings to determine whether or not screening increases identification and referral to support agencies, improves women’s...

Validity of the Brief Inpatient Screen for Intimate Partner Violence Among Adult Women

Background: Identifying intimate partner violence in healthcare settings is becoming the standard of care. The Brief Inpatient Screen was designed to assess recent emotional, physical, and sexual abuse in a general inpatient medical-surgical setting and compared to the Composite Abuse Scale. Methods: Researchers matched “cases” (inpatients screening Brief Inpatient Screen-positive) to up to four “controls” (inpatients screening Brief Inpatient Screen-negative). Forty-six female hospital inpatients ages 18–64 years completed a self-administered survey. The sensitivity and specificity of the Brief Inpatient Screen and its subscales were compared to the Composite Abuse Scale. Researchers examined the performance of the Brief Inpatient Screen when used as a verbal screen versus an anonymous written screen. Results: Twelve of 46 participants (26%) had a positive screen. Compared to the Composite Abuse Scale, the overall sensitivity and specificity of the verbal Brief Inpatient Screen were 52.6% (95% CI 28.9–75.6) and 92.6% (95% CI 75.7–99.1), respectively. The written Brief Inpatient Screen showed improved sensitivity overall (68.4%, 95% CI 43.5–87.4) for the most severe intimate partner violence. Subscale analysis revealed greater sensitivity for emotional and severe combined intimate partner violence. Conclusions: The verbal Brief Inpatient Screen, when compared to the Composite Abuse Scale, was limited in its ability to identify intimate partner violence. An anonymous written format improved sensitivity. Future research should optimize intimate partner violence screening among inpatients.

The Role of Predictive Models in Identifying Intimate Partner Violence in Healthcare Settings: A Commentary

p r The evidence that intimate partner violence (IPV) affects physical heath on many different dimensions continues to mount. The study y Bhargava et al. in this issue of the American Journal of PreventiveMedicine, which offers a predictivemodel to help identify IPV in healthcare settings, clearly adds to this body of work. They found that almost half (28 of 58) of the diagnoses and telephone complaints that they examined were significantly more common in women with a history of recent IPV than in their matched controls. This creates a challenge in developing a predictive model for the purpose of selectively inquiring about IPV in a healthcare setting. A decision needs to bemade about the relative importance of false positives and false negatives. If we agree that identifying IPV in healthcare settings is important, such a model should be particularly concerned with reducing false negatives even if this substantially reduces the specificity of the model.