OBJECTIVE: To learn about U.S. medical students' attitudes, experiences, and practices regarding intimate partner violence (IPV). METHODS: In a sample reflective of all U.S. medical schools, we surveyed the class of 2003 in 16 U.S. medical schools at three different times in their training. RESULTS: A total of 2316 medical students responded, for a response rate of 80%. By senior year, although 91% of medical students reported receiving at least some training in discussing IPV, only one fifth reported extensive training. Although 73% of students entering wards thought IPV was highly important for physicians to discuss with patients, only 55% of students entering wards, decreasing to 35% of seniors, thought IPV would be highly relevant to their own practice. Only 55% of seniors reported talking with general medicine patients at least sometimes about IPV. Greater frequency of discussing IPV for seniors was associated with being a woman (60% vs. 50% for men, p = 0.006), self-designating as politically moderate or liberal (p = 0.0008), and thinking (on entering wards) that it was highly important for physicians to talk to patients about IPV (p = 0.0002). Perceived relevance of discussing domestic violence to intended practice was substantially higher among women, underrepresented minorities, those having a personal or family history of domestic violence, and those categorizing themselves as politically liberal or very liberal. Among seniors, the prevalence of reporting a personal history of IPV was 3% for women and 1% for men; 12% of women and 7% of men reported a family or personal IPV history. CONCLUSIONS: Despite national interest in IPV issues, efforts in U.S. medical schools to increase IPV screening and prevention have not achieved saturation. These gaps in IPV instruction in medical schools are a concern because studies have reported that physicians who receive IPV education training are significantly more likely to screen for it.
OBJECTIVE: To learn about U.S. medical students' attitudes, experiences, and practices regarding intimate partner violence (IPV). METHODS: In a sample reflective of all U.S. medical schools, we surveyed the class of 2003 in 16 U.S. medical schools at three different times in their training. RESULTS: A total of 2316 medical students responded, for a response rate of 80%. By senior year, although 91% of medical students reported receiving at least some training in discussing IPV, only one fifth reported extensive training. Although 73% of students entering wards thought IPV was highly important for physicians to discuss with patients, only 55% of students entering wards, decreasing to 35% of seniors, thought IPV would be highly relevant to their own practice. Only 55% of seniors reported talking with general medicine patients at least sometimes about IPV. Greater frequency of discussing IPV for seniors was associated with being a woman (60% vs. 50% for men, p = 0.006), self-designating as politically moderate or liberal (p = 0.0008), and thinking (on entering wards) that it was highly important for physicians to talk to patients about IPV (p = 0.0002). Perceived relevance of discussing domestic violence to intended practice was substantially higher among women, underrepresented minorities, those having a personal or family history of domestic violence, and those categorizing themselves as politically liberal or very liberal. Among seniors, the prevalence of reporting a personal history of IPV was 3% for women and 1% for men; 12% of women and 7% of men reported a family or personal IPV history. CONCLUSIONS: Despite national interest in IPV issues, efforts in U.S. medical schools to increase IPV screening and prevention have not achieved saturation. These gaps in IPV instruction in medical schools are a concern because studies have reported that physicians who receive IPV education training are significantly more likely to screen for it.
Authors: Tai Pong Lam; Hoi Yan Chan; Leon Piterman; Mei Wa Wong; Kai Sing Sun; Kwok Fai Lam; Tak Hon Chan; Wu Dan; Agnes Tiwari Journal: BMC Fam Pract Date: 2020-07-30 Impact factor: 2.497