Connecticut providers knowledge and attitudes towards use of extreme risk protection orders.

IF 2.4 3区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Nishant Pandya, James Dodington, Joshua Jacob, Sarah Raskin
{"title":"Connecticut providers knowledge and attitudes towards use of extreme risk protection orders.","authors":"Nishant Pandya, James Dodington, Joshua Jacob, Sarah Raskin","doi":"10.1186/s40621-025-00565-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Extreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPOs) are a legislative tool that temporarily restrict firearm access and purchasing ability in patients at risk for harm. Data from four states with ERPO legislation, including Connecticut, estimates 17 to 23 filed ERPOs can prevent 1 suicide. Connecticut medical providers are permitted to independently file an ERPO directly to the courthouse. This survey assesses provider knowledge and attitudes towards use of ERPOs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study electronically surveyed providers from six hospitals regarding their current knowledge of the Connecticut ERPO law, perceived barriers to the use of the law and procedures that might make use more likely.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>114 providers completed the survey in 2022. 66 (57.8%) providers encountered at least 1 patient per year at risk for suicide with firearm access. Only 2 (1.7%) providers had ever initiated an ERPO, but both found it extremely helpful. Only 1 provider was extremely familiar with ERPO while 91 (78.9%) were not familiar. Barriers to using ERPO include negatively impacting the patient relationship, and not enough time to call and follow up. ERPO specific training, and trained on-site coordinators to help file and follow through were ways to encourage to ERPO utilization.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The majority of providers encounter at least one patient annually who may benefit from ERPO utilization. However, providers are largely unfamiliar with ERPO and the filing process. Time cost is the greatest barrier to its utilization. Provider training and trained coordinators to process ERPO were the two most requested supports to encourage providers to initiate ERPOs.</p>","PeriodicalId":37379,"journal":{"name":"Injury Epidemiology","volume":"12 1","pages":"17"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11921588/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Injury Epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40621-025-00565-1","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Extreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPOs) are a legislative tool that temporarily restrict firearm access and purchasing ability in patients at risk for harm. Data from four states with ERPO legislation, including Connecticut, estimates 17 to 23 filed ERPOs can prevent 1 suicide. Connecticut medical providers are permitted to independently file an ERPO directly to the courthouse. This survey assesses provider knowledge and attitudes towards use of ERPOs.

Methods: This study electronically surveyed providers from six hospitals regarding their current knowledge of the Connecticut ERPO law, perceived barriers to the use of the law and procedures that might make use more likely.

Results: 114 providers completed the survey in 2022. 66 (57.8%) providers encountered at least 1 patient per year at risk for suicide with firearm access. Only 2 (1.7%) providers had ever initiated an ERPO, but both found it extremely helpful. Only 1 provider was extremely familiar with ERPO while 91 (78.9%) were not familiar. Barriers to using ERPO include negatively impacting the patient relationship, and not enough time to call and follow up. ERPO specific training, and trained on-site coordinators to help file and follow through were ways to encourage to ERPO utilization.

Conclusion: The majority of providers encounter at least one patient annually who may benefit from ERPO utilization. However, providers are largely unfamiliar with ERPO and the filing process. Time cost is the greatest barrier to its utilization. Provider training and trained coordinators to process ERPO were the two most requested supports to encourage providers to initiate ERPOs.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Injury Epidemiology
Injury Epidemiology Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
4.50%
发文量
34
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊介绍: Injury Epidemiology is dedicated to advancing the scientific foundation for injury prevention and control through timely publication and dissemination of peer-reviewed research. Injury Epidemiology aims to be the premier venue for communicating epidemiologic studies of unintentional and intentional injuries, including, but not limited to, morbidity and mortality from motor vehicle crashes, drug overdose/poisoning, falls, drowning, fires/burns, iatrogenic injury, suicide, homicide, assaults, and abuse. We welcome investigations designed to understand the magnitude, distribution, determinants, causes, prevention, diagnosis, treatment, prognosis, and outcomes of injuries in specific population groups, geographic regions, and environmental settings (e.g., home, workplace, transport, recreation, sports, and urban/rural). Injury Epidemiology has a special focus on studies generating objective and practical knowledge that can be translated into interventions to reduce injury morbidity and mortality on a population level. Priority consideration will be given to manuscripts that feature contemporary theories and concepts, innovative methods, and novel techniques as applied to injury surveillance, risk assessment, development and implementation of effective interventions, and program and policy evaluation.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信