Integration of medical legal services into a hospital-based violence intervention program: A survey and interview-based provider needs assessment.

BACKGROUND: Violent injury among trauma surgery patients is strongly associated with exposure to harmful social determinants of health and negative long-term health outcomes. Medical-legal partnerships in other settings successfully provide patients with legal services to address similar health-harming legal needs and may offer a promising model for the care of violently injured patients. STUDY DESIGN: An electronic survey tool was distributed to clinicians and staff affiliated with the hospital-based violence intervention program at a single urban level one trauma center. Semistructured follow-up interviews were conducted with participants, and interviews were coded using thematic analysis and grounded theory. RESULTS: Participants reported many health-harming legal needs among their violently injured patients. The most commonly identified needs were: health insurance denials (62.5%); difficulty accessing crime victims compensation funds (56.3%); trouble accessing official documents (50%); and problems with non-SSDI public benefits (50%). Participants reported inconsistent methods for learning about and responding to patients' health-harming legal needs. The most common barriers to addressing these needs included the following: lack of awareness that a lawyer could help with the issue (68.8%); prioritization of other needs (68.8%); previous negative legal experiences (62.5%); and cost (62.5%). Identified needs encompass issues traditionally addressed by MLPs as well as more novel challenges faced by violent injury survivors. CONCLUSION: This survey and interview-based study identifies complex health-harming legal needs present among violently injured trauma surgery patients. Medical-legal partnerships specially designed for the setting of violent injury appear well-suited to meet these needs, potentially reducing risk of violent reinjury, long-term negative health outcomes, and health care system costs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic and Epidemiological; Level IV.

Health Effects of Policing in Hospitals: a Narrative Review.

IMPORTANCE: Law enforcement activity, in the form of outside agencies or hospital security forces, is increasingly common in American healthcare. Little is known about the potential effects of this prevalent, modifiable exposure on hospital staff and patient health. This narrative review characterizes existing evidence on the direct and indirect health effects of law enforcement activity in hospitals. OBSERVATIONS: Law enforcement activity in hospitals can affect health outcomes through four mechanisms: (1) physical health effects related to workplace violence, restraint use, excessive force, and weapon use; (2) mental health effects involving perceptions of safety and psychological distress; (3) social effects related to the patient-provider relationship, mistrust, and bias and discrimination; and (4) legal and ethical considerations affecting overall well-being. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Unchecked law enforcement activity in hospitals may risk patient physical and mental health, reduce patient trust, result in bias and discrimination, and contribute to legal and ethical rights violations. Importantly, law enforcement activity in hospitals may also contribute to staff perceptions of safety. To fill knowledge gaps on the measurable impact of law enforcement activity in the hospital on staff and patients, hospitals should collect and publicly share robust data on law enforcement activity in their facilities, create and adopt patient-centered policies to ensure safety and protect patient health and privacy, and implement evidence-based interventions that safely reduce law enforcement involvement with patients.

Law Enforcement and Patient Privacy Among Survivors of Violence: A Nationwide Mixed-Methods Study.

INTRODUCTION: During the emergent treatment of violently injured patients, law enforcement (LE) officers and health care providers frequently interact. Both have duties to protect patient health, rights, and public health, however, the balance of these duties may feel at odds. The purpose of this study is to assess hospital-based violence intervention program (HVIP) representatives' experiences with LE officers among survivors of violence and the impact of hospital policies on interactions with LE officers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A nationwide survey was distributed to the 35 HVIPs that form the Health Alliance for Violence Intervention. Data regarding respondent affiliation, programs, and perceptions of hospital policies outlining LE activity were collected. Follow-up video interviews were open coded and qualitatively analyzed using grounded theory. RESULTS: Respondents from 32 HVIPs completed the survey (91%), and 22 interviews (63%) were conducted. Common themes from interviews were: police-patient interactions; racism, bias, and victims' treatment as suspects; and training and education. Only 39% of respondents knew that policies existed and were familiar with them. Most representatives believed their hospitals' existing policies were inadequate, ineffective, or biased. Programs that reported good working relationships with LE officers offered insight on how their programs maintain these partnerships and work with LE officers towards a common goal. CONCLUSIONS: Unclear or inadequate policies relating to LE activity may jeopardize the health and privacy of violently injured patients. Primary areas identified for improvement include clarifying and revising hospital policies, education of staff and LE officers, and improved communication between health care providers and LE officers to better protect patient rights.

Addressing Legal Needs as Violence Prevention: A National Survey of Legal Services Offered through Hospital-based Violence Intervention Programs.

Hospital-based violence intervention programs (HVIPs) provide comprehensive services to survivors of community violence to address social determinants of health (SDOH) as risks factors for future violence. Medical-legal partnerships (MLPs) integrate lawyers into health care teams to address SDOH through the application of the law. Despite shared purposes, it is unknown if HVIP-MLPs exist. We sought to quantify the existing landscape of legal services provided by HVIPs, identify HVIP-MLPs, and characterize barriers to formation. Surveys and interviews were conducted in 2020 with 35 HVIPs of the Health Alliance for Violence Intervention (HAVI) concerning civil legal services. Most HVIPs screened for civil legal needs though none had an official MLP. Common civil legal needs included housing, mental health, and education. Barriers included no memorandum of understanding, legal confusion, funding, and overwhelming need. In 2021, no HVIP-MLP partnerships existed within HAVI. Establishing HVIP-MLPs may further support survivors of violence and address health inequity.

Evaluating the impact of stay-at-home orders on the time to reach the peak burden of Covid-19 cases and deaths: does timing matter?

BACKGROUND: The economic, psychological, and social impact of pandemics and social distancing measures prompt the urgent need to determine the efficacy of non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs), especially those considered most stringent such as stay-at-home and self-isolation mandates. This study focuses specifically on the impact of stay-at-home orders, both nationally and internationally, on the control of COVID-19. METHODS: We conducted an observational analysis from April to May 2020 and included both countries and US states with known stay-at-home orders. Our primary exposure was the time between the date of the first reported case of COVID-19 to an implemented stay-at-home mandate for each region. Our primary outcomes were the time from the first reported case to the highest number of daily cases and daily deaths. We conducted linear regression analyses, controlling for the case rate of the outbreak in each respective region. RESULTS: For countries and US states, a longer period of time between the first reported case and stay-at-home mandates was associated with a longer time to reach both the peak daily case and death counts. The largest effect was among regions classified as the latest 10% to implement a mandate, which in the US, predicted an extra 35.3 days (95% CI: 18.2, 52.5) to the peak number of cases, and 38.3 days (95% CI: 23.6, 53.0) to the peak number of deaths. CONCLUSIONS: Our study supports the association between the timing of stay-at-home orders and the time to peak case and death counts for both countries and US states. Regions in which mandates were implemented late experienced a prolonged duration to reaching both peak daily case and death counts.

Support for Aggressive Tobacco Control Interventions Among California Adolescents and Young Adults.

PURPOSE: The aim of the study was to assess adolescent and young adult support for banning the sale of various tobacco and marijuana products and describe whether support varies by tobacco or marijuana use status. METHODS: We analyzed data from a California school-based survey (N = 450) on tobacco access, perceptions, social norms, marketing, and use. RESULTS: We found a majority of respondents favored gradually banning the sale of cigarettes (76%); e-cigarettes other than JUULs (55%); JUULs (59%); cigars, cigarillos, and little cigars (70%); and hookah (54%). A majority of ever and never users favored immediately banning the sale of cigarettes. Support for gradual, immediate, and drugstore bans was higher among never users for every policy except an immediate ban on cigarette sales, for which there was no difference between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: There is broad support for aggressive tobacco control interventions, especially for combustible tobacco products, among a sample of California youth and young adults.