Intimate Partner Violence—Pediatric Risks of “Not Asking–Not Telling”

Family Aggression Screening Tool (FAST): Factor structure and psychometric properties of subscales

BACKGROUND

The Family Aggression Screening Tool (FAST) is an instrument to screen for experiences of maltreatment using primarily pictorial representations, including direct victimisation and exposure to intimate partner violence. The initial psychometric properties of the FAST were reported in the original research in the United Kingdom.

OBJECTIVE

This research aimed to replicate and to extend the evaluation of the psychometric properties of FAST in Brazil.

PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING

Data consisted of 648 youth aged 11 to 17 years from public schools in Brazil.

METHOD

We employed confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and exploratory graphical analysis (EGA). Concurrent validity was supported by strong correlations between the FAST's emotional and physical victimisation subscales and Childhood Trauma Questionnaire (CTQ) emotional and physical abuse subscales.

RESULTS

CFA resulted in a solution including second and first order factors, resembling the original structure. FAST's reliability was assessed both through internal consistency and test-retest, showing favorable coefficients.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that FAST has good psychometric properties for the Brazilian population with respect to both its validity and reliability.

What Are We Missing?: Evaluating an Intimate Partner Violence Screening Program in a Pediatric Emergency Department

OBJECTIVES

Our study sought to explore and assess pediatric emergency department (ED) health care providers' knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors surrounding an existing intimate partner violence (IPV) screening program 4 years after initial implementation.

METHODS

We used anonymous electronic surveys and telephone interviews to obtain provider perspectives using a mixed-methods analysis. We used χ2 tests to analyze the quantitative survey results, and an unstructured qualitative approach to analyze the telephone interviews.

RESULTS

We analyzed 141 survey responses, which correlated to a response rate of about 35% of all the providers reached, and 20 telephone interviews. Our results demonstrate that pediatric ED providers have some knowledge of our existing caregiver IPV screening program in the pediatric ED and universally endorse routine caregiver IPV screening, which both are suggestive of postimplementation cultural shifts. However, reported provider behaviors still indicate selective/targeted screening. For example, many providers reported screening males and nontraditional caregivers less often compared with female caregivers. Reported barriers potentially explaining such screening habits mirror those in existing literature: patient acuity, time, multiple caregivers being present, and more.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study indicates that more research must be done to assess root causes of provider barriers to IPV screening in pediatric ED settings because trainings and a long-standing program do not seem to be changing screening practices. Addressing these issues may lead to truly sustainable and effective IPV screening programs in pediatric ED settings.

Screening for Intimate Partner Violence in a Pediatric ED: A Quality Improvement Initiative

OBJECTIVE

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a serious public health concern and impacts the entire family unit, particularly children. We implemented an IPV screening and referral program in an urban pediatric emergency department (ED) and aimed to screen 30% of patient families for IPV by January 1, 2017.

METHODS

We used a quality improvement initiative using a nonverbal screening card to screen families when the caregiver was the sole adult present and spoke English and/or Spanish, and the patient was medically stable. Interventions included education, culture of screening initiatives, feedback, and process changes to emergency medical record (EMR) documentation. The primary outcome measure was percentage of caregivers screened in the ED over time. Our balancing measure was ED length of stay.

RESULTS

After process improvement implementations that include requiring IPV screen documentation in the EMR, using Research Electronic Data Capture for referrals, and standardizing and simplifying the screening process, caregiver screening rates increased to 30% and have remained consistently at or above that rate during the 15-month postevaluation phase. This intervention did not impact length of stay in the ED.

CONCLUSIONS

An innovative multiphase quality improvement approach to screen for IPV using a nonverbal screening card and technology within the EMR was successfully implemented in our pediatric ED. Both IPV screening and documentation rates demonstrated greatest improvement and sustainability after process improvements over other initiatives.

Supporting female survivors of intimate partner violence with disabilities: Recommendations for social workers in the emergency department

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a pervasive problem with grave consequences. Women with disabilities are among the most vulnerable groups disproportionately affected, with higher IPV rates than either women without disabilities or men with disabilities. The emergency department (ED) in particular affords a gateway into health services for female survivors of IPV, placing ED social workers in a prime position to observe potential signs of IPV and connect survivors to further assistance. This article explores the critical role ED social workers can fill in addressing the needs of female survivors of IPV with disabilities. We begin by providing background on the characteristics of IPV among women with disabilities, followed by a discussion of the opportunities and challenges inherent to assessing and intervening with survivors. We conclude by outlining recommendations for working with female survivors of IPV with disabilities in EDs, using our previous research on the topic as a guide.

Exploring the uptake and framing of research evidence on universal screening for intimate partner violence against women: a knowledge translation case study

Background

Significant emphasis is currently placed on the need to enhance health care decision-making with research-derived evidence. While much has been written on specific strategies to enable these “knowledge-to-action” processes, there is less empirical evidence regarding what happens when knowledge translation (KT) processes do not proceed as planned. The present paper provides a KT case study using the area of health care screening for intimate partner violence (IPV).

Methods

A modified citation analysis method was used, beginning with a comprehensive search (August 2009 to October 2012) to capture scholarly and grey literature, and news reports citing a specific randomized controlled trial published in a major medical journal on the effectiveness of screening women, in health care settings, for exposure to IPV. Results of the searches were extracted, coded and analysed using a multi-step mixed qualitative and quantitative content analysis process.

Results

The trial was cited in 147 citations from 112 different sources in journal articles, commentaries, books, and government and news reports. The trial also formed part of the evidence base for several national-level practice guidelines and policy statements. The most common interpretations of the trial were “no benefit of screening”, “no harms of screening”, or both. Variation existed in how these findings were represented, ranging from summaries of the findings, to privileging one outcome over others, and to critical qualifications, especially with regard to methodological rigour of the trial. Of note, interpretations were not always internally consistent, with the same evidence used in sometimes contradictory ways within the same source.

Conclusions

Our findings provide empirical data on the malleability of “evidence” in knowledge translation processes, and its potential for multiple, often unanticipated, uses. They have implications for understanding how research evidence is used and interpreted in policy and practice, particularly in contested knowledge areas.