Compliance in Rhode Island emergency departments with American Academy of Pediatrics recommendations for adolescent sexual assaults

Department of Emergency Medicine, Rhode Island Hospital, 593 Eddy St, Claverick Building, Providence, RI 02903, USA.
PEDIATRICS (Impact Factor: 5.47). 06/2008; 121(6):e1660-7. DOI: 10.1542/peds.2007-3100
Source: PubMed


We assessed the offering of American Academy of Pediatrics-recommended tests and prophylaxes after sexual assault to adolescents who presented to Rhode Island emergency departments for 3 categories of sexual exposures: sexual assault, consensual sex, and suspected sexual abuse.
This study entailed a retrospective review of visits for adolescent sexual exposures across 11 Rhode Island emergency departments between January 1995 and June 2001. Cases were identified through billing codes. Offering of each test and prophylaxis was compared by gender, category of sexual exposure, and type of sexual assault. Multivariable linear regression models were used to identify factors associated with the offering of a greater number of tests and prophylaxes after sexual assault.
The vast majority of emergency department visits for adolescent sexual exposures were by sexually assaulted girls (82.5%). Across the 3 sexual exposure categories, girls were offered tests and prophylaxes more often than boys (eg, chlamydia or gonorrhea testing and prophylaxis). Among sexually assaulted adolescents, 32.8% of girls and no boys were offered all recommended tests and prophylaxes. The multivariable linear regression found that vaginally and/or anally assaulted girls were offered, on average, 2.5 more tests and prophylaxes than patients with other types of sexual assaults. Girls presenting for care at the state's women's health care specialty hospital emergency departments were offered 1.7 more tests and prophylaxes than those evaluated in general hospital emergency departments.
Many adolescents did not receive American Academy of Pediatrics-recommended tests and prophylaxes after sexual assault. Boys received fewer tests than girls. Testing and prophylaxis varied by type of emergency department. Efforts are needed to improve and standardize emergency department medical management of adolescent sexual exposures.

Download full-text


Available from: Kenneth Mayer, Oct 06, 2015
24 Reads
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The authors explore the literature published in the past year addressing child maltreatment issues, including sexual abuse, physical child abuse, inflicted head trauma, and child abuse prevention. The body of knowledge about child abuse and its mimics continues to expand. Evident in this year's literature is the challenge which the diagnosis of child abuse creates for clinicians. Although further strides are being made toward universal education of providers, it is clear that there is still a reluctance to report abuse to child welfare agencies. The legal repercussions of diagnosing abuse can be extensive, and there has been a proliferation of medical defense experts who disagree with the commonly accepted tenets of abusive injury and who are vocal in the literature. It remains the responsibility of pediatric providers to consider child maltreatment in the differential diagnosis of any unexplained injury or medical problem. Several studies document the high rate of spanking, slapping or shaking children, and primary care clinicians may be the first professionals in a position to begin the evaluation for possible child maltreatment. Despite the natural hesitancy to diagnose abuse, clinicians have an ethical and moral obligation to address this issue both in their practice and in their communities. The short-term and long-term costs to individuals who experience family violence have been well demonstrated and include not only emotional repercussions, but also chronic health conditions, which result in significant cost to society.
    Current opinion in pediatrics 05/2009; 21(2):252-61. DOI:10.1097/MOP.0b013e328329263d · 2.53 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We present the case of a 16-year-old girl who was sexually assaulted with transanal forearm penetration resulting in rectal perforation. She required a sigmoid colostomy that was later reversed. The patient's history and physical examination was complicated by multiple factors: she was intoxicated at the time of presentation as well as during the assault; her presentation fluctuated over time, she was obese, and she carried a psychiatric diagnosis. This case report documents a rare injury caused by sexual assault in the adolescent population and also serves as a platform to discuss the evaluation and management of pediatric victims of sexual assault. We support a collaborative model of care including qualified sexual assault pediatricians, sexual assault nurse (or forensic) examiners, medical specialists, and the criminal justice system. The importance of developing updated sexual assault protocols, ensuring their implementation, and maintaining continuous quality assurance cannot be overemphasized.
    Pediatric emergency care 02/2011; 27(2):116-9. DOI:10.1097/PEC.0b013e318209af63 · 1.05 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To define the characteristics of a novel screening tool used to identify which prepubertal children should potentially receive an initial evaluation for alleged sexual assault in a nonemergent setting. Electronic medical records were retrospectively reviewed from 2007 to 2008. Visits with a chief complaint or diagnosis of alleged sexual assault for patients aged 12 years or younger were identified. Complete records, those with no evaluation before pediatric emergency-department arrival, and those with child advocacy center follow-up were included. Records were reviewed to answer the following: (1) Did the incident occur in the past 72 hours, and was there oral or genital to genital/anal contact? (2) Was genital or rectal pain, bleeding, discharge, or injury present? (3) Was there concern for the child's safety? (4) Was an unrelated emergency medical condition present? An affirmative response to any of the questions was considered a positive screen (warranting immediate evaluation); all others were considered negative screens. Those who had positive physical examination findings of anogenital trauma or infection, a change in custody, or an emergency medical condition were defined as high risk (having a positive outcome). A total of 163 cases met study criteria; 90 of 163 (55%) patients had positive screens and 73 of 163 (45%) had negative screens. No patients with negative screens were classified as high risk. The screening tool has sensitivity of 100% (95% confidence interval: 93.5-100.0). This screening tool may be effective for determining which children do not require emergency-department evaluation for alleged sexual assault.
    PEDIATRICS 08/2011; 128(2):221-6. DOI:10.1542/peds.2010-3288 · 5.47 Impact Factor
Show more