Screening for Intimate Partner Violence After Traumatic Injury: A Community-Based Participatory Qualitative Research Study

IF 1.8 3区 医学 Q2 SURGERY
Hannah Decker MD, MAS , Manami Diaz Tsuzuki BA , Emilia De Marchis MD , Jill Zawisza BA , Mary Martinez BA , Tasce Bongiovanni MD, MHS, MPP
{"title":"Screening for Intimate Partner Violence After Traumatic Injury: A Community-Based Participatory Qualitative Research Study","authors":"Hannah Decker MD, MAS ,&nbsp;Manami Diaz Tsuzuki BA ,&nbsp;Emilia De Marchis MD ,&nbsp;Jill Zawisza BA ,&nbsp;Mary Martinez BA ,&nbsp;Tasce Bongiovanni MD, MHS, MPP","doi":"10.1016/j.jss.2025.03.029","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>Intimate partner violence (IPV) is common among injured patients and adversely impacts health. We sought to better understand acceptability and appropriateness of screening for IPV following traumatic injury.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We conducted a qualitative, community-based participatory research study in partnership with a community-based organization focused on supporting survivors of IPV. We conducted semistructured interviews exploring attitudes and opinions about IPV screening after injury with English- and Spanish-speaking adults who were IPV survivors or who were admitted to a level 1 trauma center after traumatic injury. We developed a codebook based on the Health Equity Implementation Framework and analyzed data using thematic analysis.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>We conducted 19 interviews. Participants included twelve IPV survivors, ten women, seven men, and two nonbinary participants. Three interviews were conducted in Spanish. Four themes emerged as follows: 1) participants with a history of IPV described major barriers to disclosure to clinicians; 2) despite these barriers, participants widely supported the practice of asking about IPV; 3) participants highlighted key tactics to improve the experience of inquiry, screening, and disclosure after traumatic injury; and 4) participants largely did not mind the screening questions commonly used to screen patients with traumatic injuries, but identified key gaps.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>In-hospital screening for IPV among patients with traumatic injury was generally acceptable to study the participants. However, the manner in which the screening is conducted is important to both survivors and participants without a history of IPV.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":17030,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Surgical Research","volume":"309 ","pages":"Pages 233-241"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Surgical Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022480425001507","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is common among injured patients and adversely impacts health. We sought to better understand acceptability and appropriateness of screening for IPV following traumatic injury.

Methods

We conducted a qualitative, community-based participatory research study in partnership with a community-based organization focused on supporting survivors of IPV. We conducted semistructured interviews exploring attitudes and opinions about IPV screening after injury with English- and Spanish-speaking adults who were IPV survivors or who were admitted to a level 1 trauma center after traumatic injury. We developed a codebook based on the Health Equity Implementation Framework and analyzed data using thematic analysis.

Results

We conducted 19 interviews. Participants included twelve IPV survivors, ten women, seven men, and two nonbinary participants. Three interviews were conducted in Spanish. Four themes emerged as follows: 1) participants with a history of IPV described major barriers to disclosure to clinicians; 2) despite these barriers, participants widely supported the practice of asking about IPV; 3) participants highlighted key tactics to improve the experience of inquiry, screening, and disclosure after traumatic injury; and 4) participants largely did not mind the screening questions commonly used to screen patients with traumatic injuries, but identified key gaps.

Conclusions

In-hospital screening for IPV among patients with traumatic injury was generally acceptable to study the participants. However, the manner in which the screening is conducted is important to both survivors and participants without a history of IPV.
创伤后亲密伴侣暴力的筛查:一项基于社区的参与性质的研究
亲密伴侣暴力(IPV)在受伤患者中很常见,并对健康产生不利影响。我们试图更好地理解外伤性损伤后IPV筛查的可接受性和适当性。方法我们与一家专注于支持IPV幸存者的社区组织合作,进行了一项定性的、基于社区的参与性研究。我们进行了半结构化访谈,探讨了英语和西班牙语的创伤后创伤幸存者或创伤后进入一级创伤中心的成人对创伤后IPV筛查的态度和意见。我们开发了一个基于卫生公平实施框架的代码本,并使用专题分析分析数据。结果共进行了19次访谈。参与者包括12名IPV幸存者,10名女性,7名男性和2名非二元参与者。三次访谈是用西班牙语进行的。出现了以下四个主题:1)有IPV病史的参与者描述了向临床医生披露的主要障碍;2)尽管存在这些障碍,但与会者普遍支持询问IPV的做法;3)与会者强调了改善创伤后询问、筛选和披露经验的关键策略;4)参与者基本上不介意通常用于筛选创伤性损伤患者的筛选问题,但发现了关键差距。结论外伤性损伤患者在医院内进行IPV筛查是可以接受的。然而,进行筛查的方式对幸存者和没有IPV病史的参与者都很重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
4.50%
发文量
627
审稿时长
138 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Surgical Research: Clinical and Laboratory Investigation publishes original articles concerned with clinical and laboratory investigations relevant to surgical practice and teaching. The journal emphasizes reports of clinical investigations or fundamental research bearing directly on surgical management that will be of general interest to a broad range of surgeons and surgical researchers. The articles presented need not have been the products of surgeons or of surgical laboratories. The Journal of Surgical Research also features review articles and special articles relating to educational, research, or social issues of interest to the academic surgical community.
×
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