Ha Do Byon1, Mijung Lee2, Min Choi3, Knar Sagherian4, Mary Crandall1, Jane Lipscomb5. 1. School of Nursing, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia. 2. Korea Armed Forces Nursing Academy, Daejeon, Republic of Korea. 3. David Grant Medical Center, Fairfield, California. 4. College of Nursing, University of Tennessee Knoxville, Knoxville, Tennessee. 5. Schools of Nursing and Medicine, University of Maryland, Baltimore, Maryland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Home healthcare workers (HHWs) provide medical and nonmedical services to home-bound patients. They are at great risk of experiencing violence perpetrated by patients (type II violence). Establishing the reliable prevalence of such violence and identifying vulnerable subgroups are essential in enhancing HHWs' safety. We, therefore, conducted meta-analyses to synthesize the evidence for prevalence and identify vulnerable subgroups. METHODS: Five electronic databases were searched for journal articles published between 1 January 2005 and 20 March 2019. A total of 21 studies were identified for this study. Meta-analyses of prevalence were conducted to obtain pooled estimates. Meta-regression was performed to compare the prevalence between professionals and paraprofessionals. RESULTS: Prevalence estimates for HHWs were 0.223 for 12 months and 0.302 for over the career for combined violence types, 0.102 and 0.171, respectively, for physical violence, and 0.364 and 0.418, respectively, for nonphysical violence. The prevalence of nonphysical violence was higher than that of physical violence for professionals in 12 months (0.515 vs 0.135) and over the career (0.498 vs 0.224) and for paraprofessionals in 12 months (0.248 vs 0.086) and over the career (0.349 vs 0.113). Professionals reported significantly higher nonphysical violence for 12-month prevalence than paraprofessionals did (0.515 vs 0.248, P = .015). CONCLUSION: A considerable percentage of HHWs experience type II violence with higher prevalence among professionals. Further studies need to explore factors that can explain the differences in the prevalence between professionals and paraprofessionals. The findings provide support for the need for greater recognition of the violence hazard in the home healthcare workplace.
BACKGROUND: Home healthcare workers (HHWs) provide medical and nonmedical services to home-bound patients. They are at great risk of experiencing violence perpetrated by patients (type II violence). Establishing the reliable prevalence of such violence and identifying vulnerable subgroups are essential in enhancing HHWs' safety. We, therefore, conducted meta-analyses to synthesize the evidence for prevalence and identify vulnerable subgroups. METHODS: Five electronic databases were searched for journal articles published between 1 January 2005 and 20 March 2019. A total of 21 studies were identified for this study. Meta-analyses of prevalence were conducted to obtain pooled estimates. Meta-regression was performed to compare the prevalence between professionals and paraprofessionals. RESULTS: Prevalence estimates for HHWs were 0.223 for 12 months and 0.302 for over the career for combined violence types, 0.102 and 0.171, respectively, for physical violence, and 0.364 and 0.418, respectively, for nonphysical violence. The prevalence of nonphysical violence was higher than that of physical violence for professionals in 12 months (0.515 vs 0.135) and over the career (0.498 vs 0.224) and for paraprofessionals in 12 months (0.248 vs 0.086) and over the career (0.349 vs 0.113). Professionals reported significantly higher nonphysical violence for 12-month prevalence than paraprofessionals did (0.515 vs 0.248, P = .015). CONCLUSION: A considerable percentage of HHWs experience type II violence with higher prevalence among professionals. Further studies need to explore factors that can explain the differences in the prevalence between professionals and paraprofessionals. The findings provide support for the need for greater recognition of the violence hazard in the home healthcare workplace.