Shireen S Rajaram, Peggy Reisher, Matthew Garlinghouse, Kathy S Chiou
{"title":"IPV survivors' and service providers' perspectives on brain injury screening/evaluation process and impact.","authors":"Shireen S Rajaram, Peggy Reisher, Matthew Garlinghouse, Kathy S Chiou","doi":"10.1080/09602011.2024.2314873","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study explores the perspectives of intimate partner violence (IPV) survivors and staff of brain injury (BI) screening, and the neuropsychological evaluation (NPE) process. We gathered qualitative data from 17 participants - 10 IPV survivors, at risk for a BI, who had received BI screening and a NPE and a total of 7 staff in IPV-serving organizations. Interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed for key themes using thematic analysis. Survivors were over 18 years of age; the majority were between 19 and 45 years old, unemployed, unmarried, and had children. Survivors were angry, scared, and embarrassed to learn that they might have an IPV-related BI. They were thankful to have an explanation for some of their cognitive symptoms, which disrupted their daily activities, social relationships, and overall quality of life. Staff were pleased to be able to provide valuable information to their clients that could have a positive impact on their wellbeing. Overall, screening for a BI and participation in the NPE were well tolerated by IPV survivors with a possible BI. Inclusion of the perspectives of IPV survivors and support staff is an essential first step to better understanding their needs so interventions can be developed to aid their recovery.</p>","PeriodicalId":54729,"journal":{"name":"Neuropsychological Rehabilitation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neuropsychological Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09602011.2024.2314873","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This study explores the perspectives of intimate partner violence (IPV) survivors and staff of brain injury (BI) screening, and the neuropsychological evaluation (NPE) process. We gathered qualitative data from 17 participants - 10 IPV survivors, at risk for a BI, who had received BI screening and a NPE and a total of 7 staff in IPV-serving organizations. Interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed for key themes using thematic analysis. Survivors were over 18 years of age; the majority were between 19 and 45 years old, unemployed, unmarried, and had children. Survivors were angry, scared, and embarrassed to learn that they might have an IPV-related BI. They were thankful to have an explanation for some of their cognitive symptoms, which disrupted their daily activities, social relationships, and overall quality of life. Staff were pleased to be able to provide valuable information to their clients that could have a positive impact on their wellbeing. Overall, screening for a BI and participation in the NPE were well tolerated by IPV survivors with a possible BI. Inclusion of the perspectives of IPV survivors and support staff is an essential first step to better understanding their needs so interventions can be developed to aid their recovery.
期刊介绍:
Neuropsychological Rehabilitation publishes human experimental and clinical research related to rehabilitation, recovery of function, and brain plasticity. The journal is aimed at clinicians who wish to inform their practice in the light of the latest scientific research; at researchers in neurorehabilitation; and finally at researchers in cognitive neuroscience and related fields interested in the mechanisms of recovery and rehabilitation. Papers on neuropsychological assessment will be considered, and special topic reviews (2500-5000 words) addressing specific key questions in rehabilitation, recovery and brain plasticity will also be welcomed. The latter will enter a fast-track refereeing process.