Pilot educational outreach project on partner violence.
ABSTRACT To assess the impact of a multimodal educational outreach on physician screening and documentation of intimate partner violence (IPV) in primary care.
Pre- and post-intervention assessment of physician screening and chart documentation of IPV. Physician screening was assessed by post-visit survey of patients and documentation was assessed by medical record review.
Three medical offices in an urban community of approximately 1 million.
Three primary care physicians (one internist, one obstetrician, and one family physician) and 100 patients from each of these practices.
Multimodal educational outreach to physicians and their office staff regarding appropriate screening and management of IPV. A trained IPV educator made periodic office visits in 2002 to educate the physician and office staff regarding appropriate screening and management of IPV.
Before the intervention, 36/150 (24%) of sample patients reported having been previously asked about IPV and 24/150 (16%) reported being asked in a written format. After the intervention, 100/149 (67%) and 41/108(28%) reported being asked verbally or in writing, respectively.
This pilot study of three physicians suggests educational outreach represents a promising and feasible means of improving physician screening and documentation of IPV in primary care.
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: This study assesses Veterans Affairs mental health providers' understanding of intimate partner violence (IPV) and the perception of patient benefit of routine inquiry and service referral. The impact of an instructional curriculum was also examined following an interactive training. An evidence-based curriculum was offered to Veterans Affairs mental health providers. The curriculum utilized didactic methods, case scenarios, and resources regarding referrals and statutes regarding crimes related to violence and abuse. The participants completed pre- and post-training surveys to assess their perceptions about IPV and to evaluate the training. Seventy-three individuals completed the training. Fifty-four of the participants were female, and thirty-three were over the age of 45 years. Fifty-one individuals completed both surveys. There were no differences between participants' views of the seriousness of IPV in the community or their practices before or after the training. However, participants scored significantly higher on the knowledge and efficacy measures after the training (p < 0.001). Following an educational intervention, providers demonstrate more knowledge and efficacy regarding routine inquiry and referral for IPV. Barriers to universal implementation still warrant attention.Military medicine 11/2011; 176(11):1260-4. DOI:10.7205/MILMED-D-11-00258 · 0.77 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Many physicians do not routinely inquire about intimate partner violence. This qualitative study explores the process of academic detailing as an intervention to change physician behavior with regard to intimate partner violence (IPV) identification and documentation. A non-physician academic detailer provided a seven-session modular curriculum over a two-and-a-half month period. The detailer noted written details of each training session. Audiotapes of training sessions and semi-structured exit interviews with each physician were recorded and transcribed. Transcriptions were qualitatively and thematically coded and analyzed using Atlas ti®. All three study physicians reported increased clarity with regard to the scope of their responsibility to their patients experiencing IPV. They also reported increased levels of comfort in the effective identification and appropriate documentation of IPV and the provision of ongoing support to the patient, including referrals to specialized community services. Academic detailing, if presented by a supportive and knowledgeable academic detailer, shows promise to improve physician attitudes and practices with regards to patients in violent relationships.BMC Medical Education 06/2011; 11:36. DOI:10.1186/1472-6920-11-36 · 1.41 Impact Factor