Megan H Bair-Merritt1, Annie Lewis-O'Connor2, Swati Goel3, Paula Amato4, Tasneem Ismailji5, Martina Jelley6, Patricia Lenahan7, Peter Cronholm8. 1. Division of General Pediatrics, Boston Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts. Electronic address: Megan.Bair-Merritt@bmc.org. 2. Center for Women and Newborns, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts. 3. Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland. 4. Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, Oregon. 5. Academy on Violence and Abuse, Shakopee, Minnesota. 6. Department of Internal Medicine , University of Oklahoma School of Community Medicine, Tulsa, Oklahoma. 7. University of Southern California, School of Social Work, Los Angeles, California. 8. Department of Family Medicine and Community Health, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Center for Public Health Initiatives, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Abstract
CONTEXT: Primary care providers are uniquely positioned to respond to patients' disclosure of intimate partner violence (IPV). However, the research on primary care-based IPV interventions has not been systematically synthesized, making it difficult for providers, policymakers, and researchers to understand how to effectively intervene in the primary care setting. This systematic review summarizes primary care-based interventions for patients experiencing IPV. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: PubMed, PsycINFO, and CINAHL were searched from their start through September 2012; this search was augmented by bibliographic review and consultation with experts. Eligible studies included English-language, peer-reviewed articles that assessed patient-level impact of IPV interventions that originated from patients' visits to a primary care provider. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Of 80 potentially eligible studies, 17 met eligibility criteria. The majority of interventions recruited women from reproductive care sites. Interventions tended to be brief, delivered by nonphysicians, and focused on empowerment, empathetic listening, discussion of the cycle of violence and safety, and referral to community-based resources. Thirteen studies demonstrated at least one intervention-related benefit. Six of 11 articles measuring IPV persistence found reductions in future violence; two of five measuring safety-promoting behaviors found increases; and six of ten measuring IPV/community resource referrals found enhanced use. Some studies also documented health improvements. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of studies demonstrated patient-level benefit subsequent to primary care IPV interventions, with IPV/community referrals the most common positively affected outcome.
CONTEXT: Primary care providers are uniquely positioned to respond to patients' disclosure of intimate partner violence (IPV). However, the research on primary care-based IPV interventions has not been systematically synthesized, making it difficult for providers, policymakers, and researchers to understand how to effectively intervene in the primary care setting. This systematic review summarizes primary care-based interventions for patients experiencing IPV. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: PubMed, PsycINFO, and CINAHL were searched from their start through September 2012; this search was augmented by bibliographic review and consultation with experts. Eligible studies included English-language, peer-reviewed articles that assessed patient-level impact of IPV interventions that originated from patients' visits to a primary care provider. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Of 80 potentially eligible studies, 17 met eligibility criteria. The majority of interventions recruited women from reproductive care sites. Interventions tended to be brief, delivered by nonphysicians, and focused on empowerment, empathetic listening, discussion of the cycle of violence and safety, and referral to community-based resources. Thirteen studies demonstrated at least one intervention-related benefit. Six of 11 articles measuring IPV persistence found reductions in future violence; two of five measuring safety-promoting behaviors found increases; and six of ten measuring IPV/community resource referrals found enhanced use. Some studies also documented health improvements. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of studies demonstrated patient-level benefit subsequent to primary care IPV interventions, with IPV/community referrals the most common positively affected outcome.
Authors: Katherine M Iverson; Omonyêlé Adjognon; Alessandra R Grillo; Melissa E Dichter; Cassidy A Gutner; Alison B Hamilton; Shannon Wiltsey Stirman; Megan R Gerber Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2019-08-16 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Esther K Chung; Benjamin S Siegel; Arvin Garg; Kathleen Conroy; Rachel S Gross; Dayna A Long; Gena Lewis; Cynthia J Osman; Mary Jo Messito; Roy Wade; H Shonna Yin; Joanne Cox; Arthur H Fierman Journal: Curr Probl Pediatr Adolesc Health Care Date: 2016-04-18
Authors: Rachel Kimerling; Katherine M Iverson; Melissa E Dichter; Allison L Rodriguez; Ava Wong; Joanne Pavao Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2016-04-29 Impact factor: 5.128