![]()
|
C l i n i c a l G u i d e l i n e s
Think with your health care team about defining roles, responsibilities and procedures. A well-thought out protocol and a supply of forms and practitioner resources will support you in integrating effective screening into your office flow and tight schedule. (see also: Effective Health Care Response to IPV and Tools and Forms to download)
Screening Questions 1. Frame: “Because so many people are impacted by violence, I have begun to ask all my patients about it.” OR: “I am concerned that your symptoms may have been caused by someone hurting you.” AND: “If you talk to me about violence it is confidential. I will not share this information unless you are telling me about child abuse, or about [fill in other limitations if applicable].” 2. Ask directly:
If a patient discloses abuse: Give validating messages (See Interventions) and then proceed to assessment, documentation and referrals
If a patient screens negative: Open doors to future disclosure or self-referrals You could say something like: “I would like you to know that if this ever happens to you, this [clinic] is a safe place to talk about it. Also, if you ever want to pick up some more information, for yourself or for someone else, we keep brochures and safety cards in the [restrooms]. They have numbers that people can call confidentially 24 hours/day and also other resources.”
Possible Indicators of Intimate Partner Violence in your patients:
“I remember the first time I went to the ER was when he broke my arm and he of course brought me and the doctor says “what happened” and I said “I broke it in the tub”. And he looks at me from the x-rays and says “that’s not consistent, is there something else going on here?”. I looked at him and Bill and I said “No, that’s really what happened, I can’t tell you anything else” and he just looked at me and we didn’t go any further. I was thankful that he didn’t really force the issue. I couldn’t say [in front of Bill that] he hit me or pushed me and this is what happened.” “That’s the hard part - I think if the doctor or nurse suspects any kind of abuse they need to be careful when they ask the questions - if that woman is there and the batterer is with her she’s not going to disclose. So I think they need to find a window of opportunity to talk to her for a minute- but they would have to know she may still not disclose because it may not be safe and there is trust issues.” Julie, Survivor of Domestic Violence, Excerpt from the video “Voices of Survivors”, VT Curriculum on Intimate Partner Violence for Health Care Providers. Protocols must allow for private screening. Screening for IPV in front of partners or family members will force most victims to lie. This will likely increase their sense of isolation and hopelessness. It may also result in retaliatory violence if the abusive partner did not like the way the victim responded to the question. If your facility simply does not allow for routine private screening you could do indicator- based screening: whenever a patient presents with typical signs and symptoms, you arrange for private screening. This could be done by taking patients to a different room “for a urine sample”. Your health care team can invent other procedures or code words to use in order to separate an at-risk patient from their partner and ensure a few minutes in private.
It’s Not Working? Sometimes clinicians report that they have been screening for domestic violence for years but that they feel unsatisfied with their screening outcomes. The following article explains in detail the most effective screening strategies for intimate partner violence – in the words of physicians who have tried. “A Qualitative Analysis of How Physicians with Expertise in Domestic Violence Approach the Identification of Victims” Barbara Gerbert, PhD; Nona Caspers, MFA; Amy Bronstone, PhD; James Moe, PhD; and Priscilla Abercrombie, RN, NP, PhD Annals of Internal Medicine 19 October 1999, Volume 131, Issue 8 , Pages 578-584 Important insights from the study:
Find a summary at http://ebmh.bmjjournals.com/cgi/reprint/3/2/63
|
|
|
|