临床医生的态度,筛选做法和干预措施,以减少枪支相关伤害。

IF 5.2 2区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Paul J D Roszko, Jonathan Ameli, Patrick M Carter, Rebecca M Cunningham, Megan L Ranney
{"title":"临床医生的态度,筛选做法和干预措施,以减少枪支相关伤害。","authors":"Paul J D Roszko,&nbsp;Jonathan Ameli,&nbsp;Patrick M Carter,&nbsp;Rebecca M Cunningham,&nbsp;Megan L Ranney","doi":"10.1093/epirev/mxv005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Firearm injury is a leading cause of injury-related morbidity and mortality in the United States. We sought to systematically identify and summarize existing literature on clinical firearm injury prevention screening and interventions. We conducted a systematic search of PubMed, Web of Science, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), PsycInfo, and ClinicalTrials.gov for English-language original research (published 1992-2014) on clinical screening methods, patient-level firearm interventions, or patient/provider attitudes on the same. Unrelated studies were excluded through title, abstract, and full-text review, and the remaining articles underwent data abstraction and quality scoring. Of a total of 3,260 unique titles identified, 72 were included in the final review. Fifty-three articles examined clinician attitudes/practice patterns; prior training, experience, and expectations correlated with clinicians' regularity of firearm screening. Twelve articles assessed patient interventions, of which 6 were randomized controlled trials. Seven articles described patient attitudes; all were of low methodological quality. According to these articles, providers rarely screen or counsel their patients-even high-risk patients-about firearm safety. Health-care-based interventions may increase rates of safe storage of firearms for pediatric patients, suicidal patients, and other high-risk groups. Some studies show that training clinicians can increase rates of effective firearm safety screening and counseling. Patients and families are, for the most part, accepting of such screening and counseling. However, the current literature is, by and large, not high quality. Rigorous, large-scale, adequately funded studies are needed. </p>","PeriodicalId":50510,"journal":{"name":"Epidemiologic Reviews","volume":"38 1","pages":"87-110"},"PeriodicalIF":5.2000,"publicationDate":"2016-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/epirev/mxv005","citationCount":"139","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Clinician Attitudes, Screening Practices, and Interventions to Reduce Firearm-Related Injury.\",\"authors\":\"Paul J D Roszko,&nbsp;Jonathan Ameli,&nbsp;Patrick M Carter,&nbsp;Rebecca M Cunningham,&nbsp;Megan L Ranney\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/epirev/mxv005\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Firearm injury is a leading cause of injury-related morbidity and mortality in the United States. We sought to systematically identify and summarize existing literature on clinical firearm injury prevention screening and interventions. We conducted a systematic search of PubMed, Web of Science, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), PsycInfo, and ClinicalTrials.gov for English-language original research (published 1992-2014) on clinical screening methods, patient-level firearm interventions, or patient/provider attitudes on the same. Unrelated studies were excluded through title, abstract, and full-text review, and the remaining articles underwent data abstraction and quality scoring. Of a total of 3,260 unique titles identified, 72 were included in the final review. Fifty-three articles examined clinician attitudes/practice patterns; prior training, experience, and expectations correlated with clinicians' regularity of firearm screening. Twelve articles assessed patient interventions, of which 6 were randomized controlled trials. Seven articles described patient attitudes; all were of low methodological quality. According to these articles, providers rarely screen or counsel their patients-even high-risk patients-about firearm safety. Health-care-based interventions may increase rates of safe storage of firearms for pediatric patients, suicidal patients, and other high-risk groups. Some studies show that training clinicians can increase rates of effective firearm safety screening and counseling. Patients and families are, for the most part, accepting of such screening and counseling. However, the current literature is, by and large, not high quality. Rigorous, large-scale, adequately funded studies are needed. </p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50510,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Epidemiologic Reviews\",\"volume\":\"38 1\",\"pages\":\"87-110\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/epirev/mxv005\",\"citationCount\":\"139\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Epidemiologic Reviews\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/epirev/mxv005\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Epidemiologic Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/epirev/mxv005","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 139

摘要

在美国,枪支伤害是伤害相关发病率和死亡率的主要原因。我们试图系统地识别和总结临床枪支伤害预防筛查和干预的现有文献。我们对PubMed、Web of Science、护理和相关健康文献累积索引(CINAHL)、PsycInfo和ClinicalTrials.gov进行了系统搜索,以获取关于临床筛查方法、患者层面的枪支干预或患者/提供者对此的态度的英文原始研究(1992-2014)。通过标题、摘要和全文审查排除不相关研究,对剩余文章进行数据提取和质量评分。在确定的总共3 260种独特书目中,有72种被列入最后审查。53篇文章考察了临床医生的态度/实践模式;先前的培训、经验和期望与临床医生枪支筛查的规律性相关。12篇文章评估了患者干预措施,其中6篇为随机对照试验。七篇文章描述了病人的态度;所有研究的方法学质量都很低。根据这些文章,提供者很少筛选或建议他们的病人-即使是高风险的病人-关于枪支安全。以保健为基础的干预措施可能会提高儿科病人、有自杀倾向的病人和其他高危群体安全储存枪支的比率。一些研究表明,培训临床医生可以提高有效的枪支安全筛查和咨询率。大多数情况下,患者和家属都接受这种筛查和咨询。然而,目前的文献,总的来说,质量不高。需要进行严格、大规模、资金充足的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Clinician Attitudes, Screening Practices, and Interventions to Reduce Firearm-Related Injury.

Clinician Attitudes, Screening Practices, and Interventions to Reduce Firearm-Related Injury.

Firearm injury is a leading cause of injury-related morbidity and mortality in the United States. We sought to systematically identify and summarize existing literature on clinical firearm injury prevention screening and interventions. We conducted a systematic search of PubMed, Web of Science, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), PsycInfo, and ClinicalTrials.gov for English-language original research (published 1992-2014) on clinical screening methods, patient-level firearm interventions, or patient/provider attitudes on the same. Unrelated studies were excluded through title, abstract, and full-text review, and the remaining articles underwent data abstraction and quality scoring. Of a total of 3,260 unique titles identified, 72 were included in the final review. Fifty-three articles examined clinician attitudes/practice patterns; prior training, experience, and expectations correlated with clinicians' regularity of firearm screening. Twelve articles assessed patient interventions, of which 6 were randomized controlled trials. Seven articles described patient attitudes; all were of low methodological quality. According to these articles, providers rarely screen or counsel their patients-even high-risk patients-about firearm safety. Health-care-based interventions may increase rates of safe storage of firearms for pediatric patients, suicidal patients, and other high-risk groups. Some studies show that training clinicians can increase rates of effective firearm safety screening and counseling. Patients and families are, for the most part, accepting of such screening and counseling. However, the current literature is, by and large, not high quality. Rigorous, large-scale, adequately funded studies are needed.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Epidemiologic Reviews
Epidemiologic Reviews 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
8.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
10
期刊介绍: Epidemiologic Reviews is a leading review journal in public health. Published once a year, issues collect review articles on a particular subject. Recent issues have focused on The Obesity Epidemic, Epidemiologic Research on Health Disparities, and Epidemiologic Approaches to Global Health.
×
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