Leesa Hooker1, Jan Nicholson2, Kelsey Hegarty3, Lael Ridgway4, Angela Taft5. 1. Judith Lumley Centre, School of Nursing and Midwifery, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Victoria, Australia. Electronic address: l.hooker@latrobe.edu.au. 2. Judith Lumley Centre, School of Nursing and Midwifery, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Victoria, Australia. Electronic address: j.nicholson@latrobe.edu.au. 3. Department of General Practice, Faculty Medicine, Dentistry and Health Sciences, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. Electronic address: k.hegarty@unimelb.edu.au. 4. Judith Lumley Centre, School of Nursing and Midwifery, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Victoria, Australia. Electronic address: l.ridgway@latrobe.edu.au. 5. Judith Lumley Centre, School of Nursing and Midwifery, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Victoria, Australia. Electronic address: a.taft@latrobe.edu.au.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Intimate partner violence victims regularly seek health care and support. Health care providers need to understand the complexities of partner violence and how to safely respond to clients. Policy guiding nurse identification and responses exist, yet practices and education are lagging. Maternal and Child Health nurses are required to address intimate partner violence, yet their knowledge and preparedness to undertake this work is under-explored. The most effective methods of provider training are unknown. OBJECTIVES: 1) To assess the level of Maternal and Child Health nurse intimate partner violence training and nurse preparedness to address partner violence and 2) compare group differences in preparedness by nurse location, role and level of training. DESIGN: A cross sectional research design. PARTICIPANTS: Australian community based Maternal and Child Health nursing workforce. METHODS: Online survey conducted in June 2018. Survey questions explored nurse characteristics, knowledge and 'preparedness' to complete intimate partner violence work and previous violence training. Descriptive analysis involved reporting proportions within categories. Proportional group differences were analysed using Chi square test of independence. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. RESULTS: Survey response rate was 65% (735/1125). Nurses feel well prepared to complete intimate partner violence practices, although differences were seen across groups. Rural nurses feel less prepared than metropolitan colleagues, especially conducting safety assessments and documentation. Nurse co-ordinators are the most prepared. A dose response relationship is seen between training and preparedness: nurses with greater (>10 h) and more recent training (within 5 years) report being more prepared for intimate partner violence work. CONCLUSIONS: Greater systems supports are needed for sustainable nurse intimate partner violence work. In particular, opportunities are needed for rural nurse training, delivered locally and tailored to rural needs and context. Nurse co-ordinators are key leaders to achieving sustained nurse intimate partner violence practices.
BACKGROUND: Intimate partner violence victims regularly seek health care and support. Health care providers need to understand the complexities of partner violence and how to safely respond to clients. Policy guiding nurse identification and responses exist, yet practices and education are lagging. Maternal and Child Health nurses are required to address intimate partner violence, yet their knowledge and preparedness to undertake this work is under-explored. The most effective methods of provider training are unknown. OBJECTIVES: 1) To assess the level of Maternal and Child Health nurse intimate partner violence training and nurse preparedness to address partner violence and 2) compare group differences in preparedness by nurse location, role and level of training. DESIGN: A cross sectional research design. PARTICIPANTS: Australian community based Maternal and Child Health nursing workforce. METHODS: Online survey conducted in June 2018. Survey questions explored nurse characteristics, knowledge and 'preparedness' to complete intimate partner violence work and previous violence training. Descriptive analysis involved reporting proportions within categories. Proportional group differences were analysed using Chi square test of independence. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. RESULTS: Survey response rate was 65% (735/1125). Nurses feel well prepared to complete intimate partner violence practices, although differences were seen across groups. Rural nurses feel less prepared than metropolitan colleagues, especially conducting safety assessments and documentation. Nurse co-ordinators are the most prepared. A dose response relationship is seen between training and preparedness: nurses with greater (>10 h) and more recent training (within 5 years) report being more prepared for intimate partner violence work. CONCLUSIONS: Greater systems supports are needed for sustainable nurse intimate partner violence work. In particular, opportunities are needed for rural nurse training, delivered locally and tailored to rural needs and context. Nurse co-ordinators are key leaders to achieving sustained nurse intimate partner violence practices.
Authors: Cristina Guerra-Marmolejo; Eloísa Fernández-Fernández; María González-Cano-Caballero; Marina García-Gámez; Francisco J Del Río; Eloisa Fernández-Ordóñez Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-05-29 Impact factor: 3.390