医生对遭受亲密伴侣暴力的病人的反应。

PRiMER (Leawood, Kan.) Pub Date : 2025-04-24 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.22454/PRiMER.2025.584466
Courtney A Chau, Vijay Singh, Alexandra Lutnick, Mary N R Lesser
{"title":"医生对遭受亲密伴侣暴力的病人的反应。","authors":"Courtney A Chau, Vijay Singh, Alexandra Lutnick, Mary N R Lesser","doi":"10.22454/PRiMER.2025.584466","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>While guidelines exist for physicians to identify and respond to patients experiencing intimate partner violence (IPV), no studies describe physician practices of making mandated reports, advising patients about confidentiality limitations, or conducting homicide risk assessment. This pilot study aimed to explore current physician responses to patient disclosure of experiencing IPV.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We sent interview invitations from March to August 2022 to 11 US national medical societies and 118 state chapters for family medicine, general internal medicine, obstetrics and gynecology, emergency medicine, and plastic surgery. We conducted semi-structured qualitative online interviews that were recorded and transcribed. We conducted a thematic analysis to determine codes and themes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Participants consisted of ten female and three male physicians with a median of 16 years in practice. Analysis revealed two themes based on self-reported knowledge and actions: (1) limited knowledge and use of mandatory reporting and risk assessment, and (2) reliance on team members due to limited protocol awareness and time. Most participants did not recall reporting requirements, and few physicians described reporting IPV to law enforcement, advising patients of confidentiality limitations, or conducting risk assessments. As a result of time barriers and limited expertise about protocols and resources, participants relied on social work and nursing team members to respond to IPV.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Physicians in this sample describe limited knowledge and use of mandatory reporting and safety assessment. These limitations can be further investigated in larger studies to determine the need for trainings that include reporting requirements and for developing IPV response protocols.</p>","PeriodicalId":74494,"journal":{"name":"PRiMER (Leawood, Kan.)","volume":"9 ","pages":"14"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12081024/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Physician Responses to Patients Experiencing Intimate Partner Violence.\",\"authors\":\"Courtney A Chau, Vijay Singh, Alexandra Lutnick, Mary N R Lesser\",\"doi\":\"10.22454/PRiMER.2025.584466\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>While guidelines exist for physicians to identify and respond to patients experiencing intimate partner violence (IPV), no studies describe physician practices of making mandated reports, advising patients about confidentiality limitations, or conducting homicide risk assessment. This pilot study aimed to explore current physician responses to patient disclosure of experiencing IPV.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We sent interview invitations from March to August 2022 to 11 US national medical societies and 118 state chapters for family medicine, general internal medicine, obstetrics and gynecology, emergency medicine, and plastic surgery. We conducted semi-structured qualitative online interviews that were recorded and transcribed. We conducted a thematic analysis to determine codes and themes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Participants consisted of ten female and three male physicians with a median of 16 years in practice. Analysis revealed two themes based on self-reported knowledge and actions: (1) limited knowledge and use of mandatory reporting and risk assessment, and (2) reliance on team members due to limited protocol awareness and time. Most participants did not recall reporting requirements, and few physicians described reporting IPV to law enforcement, advising patients of confidentiality limitations, or conducting risk assessments. As a result of time barriers and limited expertise about protocols and resources, participants relied on social work and nursing team members to respond to IPV.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Physicians in this sample describe limited knowledge and use of mandatory reporting and safety assessment. These limitations can be further investigated in larger studies to determine the need for trainings that include reporting requirements and for developing IPV response protocols.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":74494,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"PRiMER (Leawood, Kan.)\",\"volume\":\"9 \",\"pages\":\"14\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12081024/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"PRiMER (Leawood, Kan.)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.22454/PRiMER.2025.584466\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PRiMER (Leawood, Kan.)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22454/PRiMER.2025.584466","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

虽然存在指导医生识别和应对遭受亲密伴侣暴力(IPV)的患者的指南,但没有研究描述医生制作强制性报告、建议患者保密限制或进行杀人风险评估的做法。本初步研究旨在探讨当前医生对患者披露经历IPV的反应。方法:我们于2022年3月至8月向11个美国国家医学会和118个州分会发送了访谈邀请,涉及家庭医学、普通内科、妇产科、急诊医学和整形外科。我们进行了半结构化的定性在线访谈,并进行了记录和转录。我们进行了主题分析,以确定代码和主题。结果:参与者包括10名女性和3名男性医生,中位执业年龄为16年。分析揭示了基于自我报告的知识和行动的两个主题:(1)有限的知识和使用强制性报告和风险评估,以及(2)由于协议意识和时间有限而依赖团队成员。大多数参与者不记得报告要求,很少有医生描述向执法部门报告IPV,建议患者保密限制或进行风险评估。由于时间的限制,以及协议和资源方面的专业知识有限,参与者依靠社会工作和护理团队成员来应对IPV。结论:本样本中的医生描述了有限的知识和使用强制性报告和安全评估。这些限制可以在更大规模的研究中进一步调查,以确定是否需要培训,包括报告要求和制定IPV响应协议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Physician Responses to Patients Experiencing Intimate Partner Violence.

Introduction: While guidelines exist for physicians to identify and respond to patients experiencing intimate partner violence (IPV), no studies describe physician practices of making mandated reports, advising patients about confidentiality limitations, or conducting homicide risk assessment. This pilot study aimed to explore current physician responses to patient disclosure of experiencing IPV.

Methods: We sent interview invitations from March to August 2022 to 11 US national medical societies and 118 state chapters for family medicine, general internal medicine, obstetrics and gynecology, emergency medicine, and plastic surgery. We conducted semi-structured qualitative online interviews that were recorded and transcribed. We conducted a thematic analysis to determine codes and themes.

Results: Participants consisted of ten female and three male physicians with a median of 16 years in practice. Analysis revealed two themes based on self-reported knowledge and actions: (1) limited knowledge and use of mandatory reporting and risk assessment, and (2) reliance on team members due to limited protocol awareness and time. Most participants did not recall reporting requirements, and few physicians described reporting IPV to law enforcement, advising patients of confidentiality limitations, or conducting risk assessments. As a result of time barriers and limited expertise about protocols and resources, participants relied on social work and nursing team members to respond to IPV.

Conclusions: Physicians in this sample describe limited knowledge and use of mandatory reporting and safety assessment. These limitations can be further investigated in larger studies to determine the need for trainings that include reporting requirements and for developing IPV response protocols.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信