Abstract
Purpose: This study examines policies and procedures for identifying and responding to intimate partner violence (IPV) among different types of health care settings. Methods: This epidemiologic, cross-sectional, observational study design collected data from June 2014 to January 2015 through a telephone questionnaire from a stratified random sample of 288 health care facilities in Miami-Dade County, Florida. An overall response rate of 76.2% was achieved from 72 primary care clinics, 93 obstetrics/gynecology clinics, 106 pediatric clinics, and 17 emergency departments (EDs). Results: There is a general awareness of the importance of IPV screening with 78.1% of facilities (95% CI, 73.9%-82.3%) reporting some type of IPV screening procedures. Wide variation exists, however, in how practices are implemented, with only 35.3% of facilities (95% CI, 29.5%-41.1%) implementing multicomponent, comprehensive IPV screening and response programs. Differences were also observed by setting with EDs reporting the most comprehensive programs. Conclusions: This study yields important empirical information regarding the extent to which IPV screening and response procedures are currently being implemented in both clinic and acute health care settings along with areas where improvements are needed.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Journal | Women's Health Issues |
| DOIs | |
| State | Accepted/In press - Aug 13 2015 |
Fingerprint
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Obstetrics and Gynecology
- Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
- Maternity and Midwifery
- Health(social science)
Cite this
Intimate Partner Violence Screening and Response : Policies and Procedures Across Health Care Facilities. / Williams, Jessica; Halstead, Valerie; Salani, Deborah; Koermer, Natasha.
In: Women's Health Issues, 13.08.2015.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Intimate Partner Violence Screening and Response
T2 - Policies and Procedures Across Health Care Facilities
AU - Williams, Jessica
AU - Halstead, Valerie
AU - Salani, Deborah
AU - Koermer, Natasha
PY - 2015/8/13
Y1 - 2015/8/13
N2 - Purpose: This study examines policies and procedures for identifying and responding to intimate partner violence (IPV) among different types of health care settings. Methods: This epidemiologic, cross-sectional, observational study design collected data from June 2014 to January 2015 through a telephone questionnaire from a stratified random sample of 288 health care facilities in Miami-Dade County, Florida. An overall response rate of 76.2% was achieved from 72 primary care clinics, 93 obstetrics/gynecology clinics, 106 pediatric clinics, and 17 emergency departments (EDs). Results: There is a general awareness of the importance of IPV screening with 78.1% of facilities (95% CI, 73.9%-82.3%) reporting some type of IPV screening procedures. Wide variation exists, however, in how practices are implemented, with only 35.3% of facilities (95% CI, 29.5%-41.1%) implementing multicomponent, comprehensive IPV screening and response programs. Differences were also observed by setting with EDs reporting the most comprehensive programs. Conclusions: This study yields important empirical information regarding the extent to which IPV screening and response procedures are currently being implemented in both clinic and acute health care settings along with areas where improvements are needed.
AB - Purpose: This study examines policies and procedures for identifying and responding to intimate partner violence (IPV) among different types of health care settings. Methods: This epidemiologic, cross-sectional, observational study design collected data from June 2014 to January 2015 through a telephone questionnaire from a stratified random sample of 288 health care facilities in Miami-Dade County, Florida. An overall response rate of 76.2% was achieved from 72 primary care clinics, 93 obstetrics/gynecology clinics, 106 pediatric clinics, and 17 emergency departments (EDs). Results: There is a general awareness of the importance of IPV screening with 78.1% of facilities (95% CI, 73.9%-82.3%) reporting some type of IPV screening procedures. Wide variation exists, however, in how practices are implemented, with only 35.3% of facilities (95% CI, 29.5%-41.1%) implementing multicomponent, comprehensive IPV screening and response programs. Differences were also observed by setting with EDs reporting the most comprehensive programs. Conclusions: This study yields important empirical information regarding the extent to which IPV screening and response procedures are currently being implemented in both clinic and acute health care settings along with areas where improvements are needed.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84962014083&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84962014083&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.whi.2016.03.006
DO - 10.1016/j.whi.2016.03.006
M3 - Article
C2 - 27052824
AN - SCOPUS:84962014083
JO - Women's Health Issues
JF - Women's Health Issues
SN - 1049-3867
ER -