Dentistry responding in domestic violence and abuse (DRiDVA) feasibility study: a qualitative evaluation of the implementation experiences of dental professionals.

BACKGROUND: Domestic Violence and Abuse (DVA) is a persistent public health problem in the UK. Healthcare settings offer an opportunity to ask patients about DVA, either opportunistically or in response to the presence of injuries. However, it has been suggested that dental practices and dental teams have not been actively involved supporting adult patients when presenting with injuries that might have resulted from DVA. This qualitative study was conducted to satisfy the evaluative component of the Dentistry Responding in Domestic Violence and Abuse (DRiDVA) feasibility study. METHODS: In total, 30 participants took part in the study; nine associate dentists and practice principals/owners took part in one-to-one interviews and 21 auxiliary staff took part across two focus group discussion sessions. Data were analysed using the seven step Framework Analysis process. RESULT: Three key themes were identified from the data, focusing on barriers to enquiring about domestic violence and abuse, Facilitators of identification and referral of DVA in dental settings, and recommendations for further adaptation of intervention to dental settings. CONCLUSION: DVA training coupled with robust referral pathways to a named specialist DVA advocate increases knowledge and awareness of the signs of DVA and confidence in making onward referrals. Further research is needed to understand how to increase dental professional willingness to ask patients about DVA.

Disruption of a primary health care domestic violence and abuse service in two London boroughs: interrupted time series evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Domestic violence and abuse (DVA) is experienced by about 1/3 of women globally and remains a major health concern worldwide. IRIS (Identification and Referral to Improve Safety of women affected by DVA) is a complex, system-level, training and support programme, designed to improve the primary healthcare response to DVA. Following a successful trial in England, since 2011 IRIS has been implemented in eleven London boroughs. In two boroughs the service was disrupted temporarily. This study evaluates the impact of that service disruption. METHODS: We used anonymised data on daily referrals received by DVA service providers from general practices in two IRIS implementation boroughs that had service disruption for a period of time (six and three months). In line with previous work we refer to these as boroughs B and C. The primary outcome was the number of daily referrals received by the DVA service provider across each borough over 48 months (March 2013-April 2017) in borough B and 42 months (October 2013-April 2017) in borough C. The data were analysed using interrupted-time series, non-linear regression with sensitivity analyses exploring different regression models. Incidence Rate Ratio (IRR), 95% confidence intervals and p-values associated with the disruption were reported for each borough. RESULTS: A mixed-effects negative binomial regression was the best fit model to the data. In borough B, the disruption, lasted for about six months, reducing the referral rate significantly (p = 0.006) by about 70% (95%CI = (23,87%)). In borough C, the three-month service disruption, also significantly (p = 0.005), reduced the referral rate by about 49% (95% CI = (18,68%)). CONCLUSIONS: Disrupting the IRIS service substantially reduced the rate of referrals to DVA service providers. Our findings are evidence in favour of continuous funding and staffing of IRIS as a system level programme.

Improving the healthcare response to domestic violence and abuse in UK primary care: interrupted time series evaluation of a system-level training and support programme.

BACKGROUND: It is unknown whether interventions known to improve the healthcare response to domestic violence and abuse (DVA)-a global health concern-are effective outside of a trial. METHODS: An observational interrupted time series study in general practice. All registered women aged 16 and above were eligible for inclusion. In four implementation boroughs' general practices, there was face-to-face, practice-based, clinically relevant DVA training, a prompt in the electronic medical record, reminding clinicians to consider DVA, a simple referral pathway to a named advocate, ensuring direct access for women to specialist services, overseen by a national, health-focused DVA organisation, fostering best practice. The fifth comparator borough had only a session delivered by a local DVA specialist agency at community venues conveying information to clinicians. The primary outcome was the daily number of referrals received by DVA workers per 1000 women registered in a general practice, from 205 general practices, in all five northeast London boroughs. The secondary outcome was recorded new DVA cases in the electronic medical record in two boroughs. Data was analysed using an interrupted time series with a mixed effects Poisson regression model. RESULTS: In the 144 general practices in the four implementation boroughs, there was a significant increase in referrals received by DVA workers-global incidence rate ratio of 30.24 (95% CI 20.55 to 44.77, p < 0.001). There was no increase in the 61 general practices in the other comparator borough (incidence rate ratio of 0.95, 95% CI 0.13 to 6.84, p = 0.959). New DVA cases recorded significantly increased with an incident rate ratio of 1.27 (95% CI 1.09 to 1.48, p < 0.002) in the implementation borough but not in the comparator borough (incidence rate ratio of 1.05, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.34, p = 0.699). CONCLUSIONS: Implementing integrated referral routes, training and system-level support, guided by a national health-focused DVA organisation, outside of a trial setting, was effective and sustainable at scale, over four years (2012 to 2017) increasing referrals to DVA workers and new DVA cases recorded in electronic medical records.

Improving the healthcare response to domestic violence and abuse in primary care: protocol for a mixed method evaluation of the implementation of a complex intervention.

BACKGROUND: Domestic violence and abuse remains a major health concern. It is unknown whether the improved healthcare response to domestic violence and abuse demonstrated in a cluster randomised controlled trial of IRIS (Identification and Referral to Improve Safety), a complex intervention, including general practice based training, support and referral programme, can be achieved outside a trial setting. AIM: To evaluate the impact over four years of a system wide implementation of IRIS, sequentially into multiple areas, outside the setting of a trial. METHODS: An interrupted time series analysis of referrals received by domestic violence and abuse workers from 201 general practices, in five northeast London boroughs; alongside a mixed methods process evaluation and qualitative analysis. Segmented regression interrupted time series analysis to estimate impact of the IRIS intervention over a 53-month period. A secondary analysis compares the segmented regression analysis in each of the four implementation boroughs, with a fifth comparator borough. DISCUSSION: This is the first interrupted time series analysis of an intervention to improve the health care response to domestic violence. The findings will characterise the impact of IRIS implementation outside a trial setting and its suitability for national implementation in the United Kingdom.

Women's experiences of referral to a domestic violence advocate in UK primary care settings: a service-user collaborative study.

BACKGROUND: Women experiencing domestic violence and abuse (DVA) are more likely to be in touch with health services than any other agency, yet doctors and nurses rarely ask about abuse, often failing to identify signs of DVA in their patients. AIM: To understand women's experience of disclosure of DVA in primary care settings and subsequent referral to a DVA advocate in the context of a DVA training and support programme for primary care clinicians: Identification and Referral to Improve Safety (IRIS). DESIGN AND SETTING: A service-user collaborative study using a qualitative study design. Recruitment was from across IRIS trial settings in Bristol and Hackney, London. METHOD: Twelve women who had been referred to one of two specialist DVA advocates (based at specialist DVA agencies) were recruited by a GP taking part in IRIS. Women were interviewed by a survivor of DVA and interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Analysis was thematic using constant comparison. RESULTS: GPs and nurses can play an important role in identifying women experiencing DVA and referring them to DVA specialist agencies. GPs may also have an important role to play in helping women maintain any changes they make as a result of referral to an advocate, by asking about DVA in subsequent consultations. CONCLUSION: A short time interval between a primary care referral and initial contact with an advocate was valued by some women. For the initial contact with an advocate to happen as soon as possible after a primary care referral has been made, a close working relationship between primary care and the third sector needs to be cultivated.

Identification and Referral to Improve Safety (IRIS) of women experiencing domestic violence with a primary care training and support programme: a cluster randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Most clinicians have no training about domestic violence, fail to identify patients experiencing abuse, and are uncertain about management after disclosure. We tested the effectiveness of a programme of training and support in primary health-care practices to increase identification of women experiencing domestic violence and their referral to specialist advocacy services. METHODS: In this cluster randomised controlled trial, we selected general practices in two urban primary care trusts, Hackney (London) and Bristol, UK. Practices in which investigators from this trial were employed or those who did not use electronic records were excluded. Practices were stratified by proportion of female doctors, postgraduate training status, number of patients registered, and percentage of practice population on low incomes. Within every primary care trust area, we randomised practices with a computer-minimisation programme with a random component to intervention or control groups. The intervention programme included practice-based training sessions, a prompt within the medical record to ask about abuse, and a referral pathway to a named domestic violence advocate, who also delivered the training and further consultancy. The primary outcome was recorded referral of patients to domestic violence advocacy services. The prespecified secondary outcome was recorded identification of domestic violence in the electronic medical records of the general practice. Poisson regression analyses accounting for clustering were done for all practices receiving the intervention. Practice staff and research associates were not masked and patients were not aware they were part of a study. This study is registered at Current Controlled Trials, ISRCTN74012786. FINDINGS: We randomised 51 (61%) of 84 eligible general practices in Hackney and Bristol. Of these, 24 received a training and support programme, 24 did not receive the programme, and three dropped out before the trial started. 1 year after the second training session, the 24 intervention practices recorded 223 referrals of patients to advocacy and the 24 control practices recorded 12 referrals (adjusted intervention rate ratio 22·1 [95% CI 11·5-42·4]). Intervention practices recorded 641 disclosures of domestic violence and control practices recorded 236 (adjusted intervention rate ratio 3·1 [95% CI 2·2-4·3). No adverse events were recorded. INTERPRETATION: A training and support programme targeted at primary care clinicians and administrative staff improved referral to specialist domestic violence agencies and recorded identification of women experiencing domestic violence. Our findings reduce the uncertainty about the benefit of training and support interventions in primary care settings for domestic violence and show that screening of women patients for domestic violence is not a necessary condition for improved identification and referral to advocacy services. FUNDING: Health Foundation.

Primary care identification and referral to improve safety of women experiencing domestic violence (IRIS): protocol for a pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Domestic violence, which may be psychological, physical, sexual, financial or emotional, is a major public health problem due to the long-term health consequences for women who have experienced it and for their children who witness it. In populations of women attending general practice, the prevalence of physical or sexual abuse in the past year from a partner or ex-partner ranges from 6 to 23%, and lifetime prevalence from 21 to 55%. Domestic violence is particularly important in general practice because women have many contacts with primary care clinicians and because women experiencing abuse identify doctors and nurses as professionals from whom they would like to get support. Yet health professionals rarely ask about domestic violence and have little or no training in how to respond to disclosure of abuse. METHODS/DESIGN: This protocol describes IRIS, a pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial with the general practice as unit of randomisation. Our trial tests the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a training and support programme targeted at general practice teams. The primary outcome is referral of women to specialist domestic violence agencies. Forty-eight practices in two UK cities (Bristol and London) are randomly allocated, using minimisation, into intervention and control groups. The intervention, based on an adult learning model in an educational outreach framework, has been designed to address barriers to asking women about domestic violence and to encourage appropriate responses to disclosure and referral to specialist domestic violence agencies. Multidisciplinary training sessions are held with clinicians and administrative staff in each of the intervention practices, with periodic feedback of identification and referral data to practice teams. Intervention practices have a prompt to ask about abuse integrated in the electronic medical record system. Other components of the intervention include an IRIS champion in each practice and a direct referral pathway to a named domestic violence advocate. DISCUSSION: This is the first European randomised controlled trial of an intervention to improve the health care response to domestic violence. The findings will have the potential to inform training and service provision. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN74012786.