Patient opinions of screening for intimate partner violence in a fracture clinic setting: P.O.S.I.T.I.V.E.: a multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: Approximately one-third of injured women presenting to fracture clinics have experienced some form of intimate partner violence in the past year. The aim of the current study was to determine patients' perceptions on screening for intimate partner violence during visits to a surgical fracture clinic. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study to evaluate patients' perceptions and opinions on screening for intimate partner violence in an orthopaedic fracture clinic. Eligible patients anonymously completed a self-reported written questionnaire, which included questions on patient demographics, attitudes toward intimate partner violence in general, the acceptability of screening for intimate partner violence in an orthopaedic fracture clinic, and opinions on how, when, and by whom the screening should be conducted. RESULTS: The study included 750 patients (421 male and 329 female) at five clinical sites in Canada and the Netherlands. The majority (554, 73.9%) of the respondents either "agreed" or "strongly agreed" that the fracture clinic was a good place for health-care providers to ask about intimate partner violence. The majority (671, 89.5%) also agreed that health-care providers should screen for intimate partner violence by means of face-to-face interactions rather than other, more passive methods. Increased openness to screening was significantly associated with female sex, higher income, and higher education (F3595 = 21.950, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings demonstrated that the majority of patients endorse active screening for intimate partner violence in orthopaedic fracture clinics.

Prevalence of abuse and intimate partner violence surgical evaluation (PRAISE) in orthopaedic fracture clinics: a multinational prevalence study.

BACKGROUND: Intimate partner violence (IPV) is the leading cause of non-fatal injury to women worldwide. Musculoskeletal injuries, which are often seen by orthopaedic surgeons, are the second most common manifestation of IPV. We aimed to establish the 12-month and lifetime prevalence of IPV in women presenting to orthopaedic fracture clinics. METHODS: The PRAISE team of 80 investigators did a cross-sectional study of a consecutive sample of 2945 female participants at 12 orthopaedic fracture clinics in Canada, the USA, the Netherlands, Denmark, and India. Participants who met the eligibility criteria anonymously answered direct questions about physical, emotional, and sexual IPV, and completed two previously developed questionnaires (Women Abuse Screening Tool [WAST] and Partner Violence Screen [PVS]). We did a multivariable logistic regression analysis to investigate the risk factors associated with IPV. FINDINGS: The overall response rate was 85% (2344 of 2759 patients provided informed consent). One in six women (455/2839, 16·0%, 95% CI 14·7-17·4%) disclosed a history of IPV within the past year, and one in three (882/2550, 34·6%, 32·8-36·5%) had experienced IPV in their lifetime. 49 women (1·7%, 1·3-2·2%) attended their clinic visit as a direct consequence of IPV, only seven of whom (14%) had ever been asked about IPV in a health-care setting. Women in short-term relationships (OR 0·584, 99% CI 0·396-0·860, p=0·0001) were at increased risk of IPV and physical abuse in the past 12 months in this study. Compared with women in Canada and the USA, those in the Netherlands and Denmark were at reduced risk of any abuse in the past 12 months, physical abuse in lifetime, and any abuse in lifetime (OR 0·595, 99% CI 0·427-0·830, p<0·0001; 0·630, 0·445-0·890, p=0·001; and 0·464, 0·352-0·612, p<0·0001, respectively). INTERPRETATION: PRAISE is the largest prevalence study done so far in orthopaedics. Orthopaedic surgeons should be confident in the assumption that one in six women have a history of physical abuse, and that one in 50 injured women will present to the clinic as a direct result of IPV. Our findings warrant serious consideration for fracture clinics to improve identification of, respond to, and provide referral services for, victims of IPV. FUNDING: Orthopaedic Trauma Association, Canadian Orthopaedic Foundation, and the McMaster University Surgical Associates. MB is partly funded by a Canada Research Chair.

Orthopaedic surgeons' knowledge and misconceptions in the identification of intimate partner violence against women.

BACKGROUND: Intimate partner violence (IPV)-physical, sexual, psychologic, or financial abuse between intimate partners-is the most common cause of nonfatal injury to women in North America. As many IPV-related injuries are musculoskeletal, orthopaedic surgeons are well positioned to identify and assist these patients. However, data are lacking regarding surgeons' knowledge of the prevalence of IPV in orthopaedic practices, surgeons' screening and management methods, and surgeons' perceptions about IPV. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We aimed to identify (1) surgeon attitudes and beliefs regarding victims of IPV and batterers and (2) perceptions of surgeons regarding their role in identifying and assisting victims of IPV. METHODS: We surveyed 690 surgeon members of the Orthopaedic Trauma Association. The survey had three sections: (1) general perception of orthopaedic surgeons regarding IPV; (2) perceptions of orthopaedic surgeons regarding victims and batterers; and (3) orthopaedic relevance of IPV. One hundred fifty-three surgeons responded (22%). RESULTS: Respondents manifested key misconceptions: (1) victims must be getting something out of the abusive relationships (16%); (2) some women have personalities that cause the abuse (20%); and (3) the battering would stop if the batterer quit abusing alcohol (40%). In the past year, approximately ½ the respondents (51%) acknowledged identifying a victim of IPV; however, only 4% of respondents currently screen injured female patients for IPV. Surgeons expressed concerns regarding lack of knowledge in the management of abused women (30%). CONCLUSION: Orthopaedic surgeons had several misconceptions about victims of IPV and batterers. Targeted educational programs on IPV are needed for surgeons routinely caring for injured women.

Intimate partner violence and musculoskeletal injury: bridging the knowledge gap in orthopaedic fracture clinics.

Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a serious health issue. There have been widespread research efforts in the area of IPV over the past several decades, primarily focusing on obstetrics, emergency medicine, and primary care settings. Until recently there has been a paucity of research focusing on IPV in surgery, and thus a resultant knowledge gap. Renewed interest in the underlying risk of IPV among women with musculoskeletal injuries has fueled several important studies to determine the nature and scope of this issue in orthopaedic surgery. Our review summarizes the evidence from surgical research in the field of IPV and provides recommendations for developing and evaluating an IPV identification and support program and opportunities for future research.

Perceptions of intimate partner violence: a cross sectional survey of surgical residents and medical students.

BACKGROUND: Intimate partner violence (IPV) is an important health issue. Many medical students and residents have received training relating to IPV, but previous studies show that many students feel that their training has been inadequate. Our objective was to assess the knowledge, attitudes and perceptions about IPV among university medical students and surgical residents. METHODS: We administered an online survey to a sample of Ontario medical students and surgical residents. The survey instrument was a modified version of the Provider Survey. RESULTS: Two hundred medical students and surgical residents participated in the survey (response rate: 29%). Misperceptions about IPV among respondents included the following: 1) victims must get something from the abusive relationships (18.2%), 2) physicians should not interfere with a couple's conflicts (21%), 3) asking about IPV risks offending patients (45%), 4) Victims choose to be victims (11.1%), 5) it usually takes 'two to tango' (18.3%), and 6) some patients' personalities cause them to be abused (41.1%). The majority of respondents (75.0%) believed identifying IPV was very relevant to clinical practice. The majority of medical students (91.2%) and surgical residents (96.9%) estimated the IPV prevalence in their intended practice to be 10% or less. Most of the medical students (84%) and surgical residents (60%) felt that their level of training on IPV was inadequate and over three quarters of respondents (77.2%) expressed a desire to receive additional education and training on IPV. CONCLUSIONS: There are misconceptions among Canadian medical students and surgical residents about intimate partner violence. These misconceptions may stem from lack of education and personal discomfort with the issue or from other factors such as gender. Curricula in medical schools and surgical training programs should appropriately emphasize educational opportunities in the area of IPV. © 2013 KUMS, All rights reserved.

Screening for intimate partner violence in orthopedic patients: a comparison of three screening tools.

Accurately identifying victims of intimate partner violence (IPV) can be a challenge for clinicians and clinical researchers. Multiple instruments have been developed and validated to identify IPV in patients presenting to health care practitioners, including the Woman Abuse Screening Tool (WAST) and the Partner Violence Screen (PVS). The purpose of the current study is to determine if female patients attending an outpatient orthopaedic fracture clinic who screen positive for IPV using three direct questions (direct questioning) also screen positive on the WAST and PVS. We conducted a prevalence study at two Level I trauma centres to determine the prevalence of IPV in female patients presenting to orthopaedic fracture clinics for treatment of injuries. We used three methods to determine the prevalence of IPV; 1) direct questioning, 2) WAST, and 3) PVS. We compared the prevalence rates across the three screening tools. Ninety-four women screened positive for IPV using any method. The prevalence of IPV was 30.5% when a direct questioning approach was utilized, 12.4% using the WAST, and 9.2% using the PVS. The WAST identified 37.2% (35/94) of the IPV victims detected and the PVS identified 27.7% (53/94) of the IPV victims detected, whereas direct questioning identified 89.4% of the IPV victims. Identification of IPV may be under-estimated by the WAST and PVS screening tools. Our findings suggest direct questioning may increase the frequency of disclosure of IPV among women attending outpatient orthopaedic clinics.

The prevalence of intimate partner violence across orthopaedic fracture clinics in Ontario.

BACKGROUND: from 1999 to 2004, an estimated 653,000 women in Canada were either physically or sexually abused by their current or previous intimate partners. We aimed to determine the proportion of women presenting to orthopaedic fracture clinics for the treatment of musculoskeletal injuries who had experienced intimate partner violence, defined as physical, sexual, or emotional abuse, within the past twelve months. METHODS: we completed a cross-sectional study of 282 injured women attending two Level-I trauma centers in Canada. Female patients presenting to the orthopaedic fracture clinics anonymously completed two previously developed self-reported written questionnaires, the Woman Abuse Screening Tool (WAST) and the Partner Violence Screen (PVS), to determine the prevalence of intimate partner violence. The questionnaire also contained questions that pertain to the participant's demographic characteristics, fracture characteristics, and experiences with health-care utilization. RESULTS: the overall prevalence of intimate partner violence (emotional, physical, and sexual abuse) within the last twelve months was 32% (95% confidence interval, 26.4% to 37.2%). Twenty-four (8.5%) of the injured women disclosed a history of physical abuse in the past year. Seven women indicated that the cause for their current visit was directly related to physical abuse. Ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and injury patterns were not associated with abuse. Of the twenty-four women who reported physical abuse, only four had been asked about intimate partner violence by a physician; none of these physicians were the treating orthopaedic surgeons. CONCLUSIONS: our study suggests a high prevalence of intimate partner violence among female patients with injuries who presented to two orthopaedic fracture clinics in Ontario. Surgeons and health-care personnel in fracture clinics should consider intimate partner violence when interacting with injured women.

PRevalence of Abuse and Intimate Partner Violence Surgical Evaluation (P.R.A.I.S.E.): rationale and design of a multi-center cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Intimate partner violence (IPV) is described by the American Medical Association as "a pattern of coercive behaviors that may include repeated battering and injury, psychological abuse, sexual assault, progressive social isolation, deprivation, and intimidation." The long-term consequences of IPV include health risks, posttraumatic stress disorder, depression, and staggering economic costs for health care of victims. Intimate partner violence is often underreported among women who seek medical attention. The current study seeks to address the issue of possible underreporting of IPV in orthopaedic fracture clinics by establishing prevalence rates of IPV among women seeking treatment for musculoskeletal injuries. METHODS/DESIGN: We propose a cross-sectional multicenter study wherein 3,600 women will complete a self-reported written questionnaire across clinical sites in North America, Europe, and Australia. Recruitment of participants will take place at orthopaedic fracture clinics at each clinical site. The questionnaire will contain a validated set of questions used to screen for IPV, as well as questions that pertain to the participant's demographic, injury characteristics, and experiences with health care utilization. Female patients presenting to the orthopaedic fracture clinics will complete two validated self-reported written questionnaires (Woman Abuse Screening Tool (WAST) and the Partner Violence Screen (PVS)) to determine the prevalence of IPV in the past 12 months and in their lifetime. The two questionnaires were designed for rapid assessment of IPV status in emergency departments, family practice, and women's health clinics that we believe are similar to our intended setting of an orthopaedic clinic. DISCUSSION: If the prevalence of IPV among women attending orthopaedic clinics is greater than the current perceptions of orthopaedic surgeons, this study will serve to advocate for the continued education of medical professionals to better recognize probable IPV cases and offer existing services to enhance the care of these patients.

The final straw: a qualitative study to explore patient decisions to undergo total hip arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Research focusing on the complex factors leading to patients decisions to replace their arthritic hip has been limited in favor of quantitative studies focusing on surgery outcomes. The purpose of this study was twofold: (1) to further explore patients experiences and their decision-making processes to undergo total hip arthroplasty and (2) to examine the factors that influenced patients decisions about the type of surgical procedure (approach, implants). METHODS: In 2005, 18 patients who were either scheduled for an upcoming total hip arthroplasty or had completed total hip arthroplasty participated in semi-structured interviews (N = 9) or a focus group (N = 9) regarding their decision to undergo hip arthroplasty. The canons and procedures of the grounded theory approach to qualitative research guided the coding and content analysis of the data derived from the focus group and semi-structured interviews. RESULTS: Three main categories or core concepts that emerged from the interviews and focus group were labeled (1) limitations, (2) psychological distress, and (3) perceptions about hip arthroplasty. These three categories yielded a total of ten subcategories. The participants in our study had lived with a hip arthritis to a point beyond which all decided to have hip replacement surgery ("the final straw"). Decisions to undergo surgery were based upon an increasing severity of limitations affecting their basic quality of daily living, relationships and psychological well-being. Participants acknowledged that their choice of surgeon, type of procedure and implants were largely based on their desire to choose a technique that minimized disruption to their muscles and led to a quick recovery. Having decided on the type of surgery, participants used colleagues, family, and the internet to identify the most qualified surgeons in their area. CONCLUSION: Our study sheds further light on the complex process of patients "final straw" towards a total hip arthroplasty. Surgeons should be aware of patients personal processes in order to optimize their surgical experiences and outcomes. Future research should aim to resolve optimal approaches to arthroplasty in light of patients preferences for muscle-sparing and "minimally invasive" approaches.

(Mis)perceptions about intimate partner violence in women presenting for orthopaedic care: a survey of Canadian orthopaedic surgeons.

BACKGROUND: Domestic violence is the most common cause of nonfatal injury to women in North America. In a review of 144 such injuries, the second most common manifestation of intimate partner violence was musculoskeletal injuries (28%). The American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons is explicit that orthopaedic surgeons should play a role in the screening and appropriate identification of victims. We aimed to identify the perceptions, attitudes, and knowledge of Canadian orthopaedic surgeons with regard to intimate partner violence. METHODS: We surveyed members of the Canadian Orthopaedic Association to identify attitudes toward intimate partner violence. With use of a systematic random sample, 362 surgeons were mailed questionnaires. The questionnaire consisted of three sections: (1) the general attitude of the orthopaedic surgeon toward intimate partner violence, (2) the attitude of the orthopaedic surgeon toward victims and batterers, and (3) the clinical relevance of intimate partner violence in orthopaedic surgery. Up to three follow-up mailings were performed to enhance response rates. RESULTS: A total of 186 orthopaedic surgeons responded (a response rate of 51%), and 167 (91%) of them were men. Most orthopaedic surgeons (95%) estimated that <10% of their patients were victims of intimate partner violence, and most respondents (80%) believed that it was exceedingly rare (a prevalence of <1%). The concept of mandatory screening for intimate partner violence was met with uncertainty by 116 surgeons (64%). Misconceptions were perpetuated by surgeons who believed that inquiring about intimate partner violence was an invasion of the victim's privacy, that investigating intimate partner violence was not part of their duty, that victims choose to be a victim, and that victims play a proactive role in causing their abuse. By the completion of the survey, the majority of surgeons (91%) believed that knowledge about intimate partner violence was relevant to their surgical practice. CONCLUSIONS: Discomfort with the issue and lack of education have led to misconceptions among Canadian orthopaedic surgeons about intimate partner violence. The relevance of intimate partner violence to surgical practice is well understood, but studies regarding its prevalence are needed as a first step to change the current paradigm in orthopaedic surgery.

Child protection involvement and victims of intimate partner violence: is there a bias?

Several studies have explored the disproportionate number of children of color involved in child protective services, raising concerns that racial bias in the system results in more women of color being referred to child protection. The authors conducted a case series to analyze whether a woman's race and ethnicity influenced referrals to child protective services in a domestic violence context. Data were obtained through interview records of 263 women (38% women of color) at a Minneapolis-based advocacy and therapy organization. The findings suggest that women who face multiple forms of oppressions may have greater risk of being involved with child protection services.

Musculoskeletal manifestations of physical abuse after intimate partner violence.

BACKGROUND: Domestic violence is the most common cause of nonfatal injury to women in the United States, with an estimated cost of $50 billion annually. Little is known about the spectrum of musculoskeletal injuries in victims of domestic violence. We examined the characteristics of abused women, the prevalence of musculoskeletal injuries, and the variables associated with increasing frequency of physical violence against women. METHODS: We identified all female survivors of intimate partner violence who were referred to the Minnesota Domestic Abuse Program from January 1, 2002, through December 31, 2003. Characteristics of each woman's background, abuse history, and injuries were obtained by a trained program therapist in an in-depth, 2-hour intake interview. Specific data forms were completed for each interview. Five forms of experienced abuse were explored (physical, emotional, psychological, sexual, and financial). Injuries were subcategorized as (1) head and neck, (2) musculoskeletal, (3) chest, (4) abdomen, and (5) skin (integumentary system). We conducted regression analyses to determine factors associated with the frequency of physical abuse. RESULTS: Of 270 potentially eligible women, 263 (97%) with complete records were included. Women were commonly Caucasian (62%) in their third decade of life with one or more children (87%). A history of abuse was recalled by over half of the women (54%). The most prevalent forms of abuse were emotional (84%), psychological (68%), physical (43%), sexual (41%), and financial (38%). Child protective services were concomitantly involved in half of the women living in abusive relationships. Among those women who reported physical abuse, 36% sought medical attention. We identified 144 injuries in 218 physically abused women. Head and neck injuries were the most prevalent after intimate partner violence (40%). Musculoskeletal injuries were the second most common manifestation of intimate partner violence (28%). The spectrum of injuries included sprains (n = 21 injuries), fracture/dislocations (n = 17 injuries), and foot injuries (n = 2 injuries). Our analysis identified seven variables associated with increasing physical abuse frequency. These included (1) younger age (p = 0.04); (2) shorter length of relationship (p = 0.049); (3) emotional abuse (p = 0.02); (4) psychological abuse (p = 0.003); (5) sexual abuse (p = 0.004); (6) drug dependency (p = 0.05); and (7) alcohol dependency (p = 0.045). CONCLUSIONS: Among women presenting to a domestic violence therapy program seeking counseling, head and neck and musculoskeletal injuries were most common. Frequency of physical abuse was most likely to be associated with younger women who are in short-term relationships, have chemical and alcohol dependency, and concomitant emotional, psychological, and sexual abuse. Recognizing musculoskeletal injuries in women as a potential result of intimate partner violence is warranted. Identifying children exposed to abusive situations may further alert treating surgeons to the potential for intimate partner violence in the mother.

Chiropractors' perceptions about intimate partner violence: a cross-sectional survey.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to assess chiropractors' attitudes, beliefs, knowledge, and experience about intimate partner violence (IPV). METHODS: This cross-sectional survey was developed by members of the Violence Against Women Health Research Collaborative. The survey was disseminated to a voluntary, nonrandom convenience sample of chiropractors attending a 3-day continuing education seminar. Surveys were distributed at the entrances of the seminar session rooms and placed on luncheon tables. Respondents returned surveys to collection boxes. RESULTS: Ninety-three doctors of chiropractic completed the survey. Respondents estimated that only 5.2% (95% confidence interval, 3.3%-7.0%) of their female patients were victims of IPV. General knowledge of IPV was good among respondents. Knowledge of clinical indicators and victim's management was fair to poor. Only 22% of respondents identified the most commonly injured body regions among battered women. Lack of knowledge, personal discomfort, and time constraints were all cited as barriers to IPV screening. CONCLUSIONS: Our survey indicates that doctors of chiropractic underestimate the prevalence of IPV among their female patients. Like other health care specialists, chiropractors cite multiple IPV screening barriers, especially lack of knowledge. Doctors of chiropractic would benefit from education and training in IPV to enable them to better identify and assist patients who are victims of IPV.

Challenges to the practice of evidence-based medicine during residents' surgical training: a qualitative study using grounded theory.

PURPOSE: To examine surgical trainees' barriers to implementing and adopting evidence-based medicine (EBM) in the day-to-day care of surgical patients. METHOD: In 2000, 28 surgical residents from various subspecialties at a hospital affiliated with McMaster University Faculty of Health Sciences in Ontario, Canada, participated in a focus group (n = 8) and semistructured interviews (n = 20) to explore their perceptions of barriers to the practice of EBM during their training. Additional themes were explored, such as definitions of EBM and potential strategies to implement EBM during training. The canons and procedures of the grounded theory approach to qualitative research guided the coding and content analysis of the data derived from the focus group and semistructured interviews. RESULTS: Residents identified personal barriers, staff-surgeon barriers, and institutional barriers that limited their ability to apply EBM in their daily activities. Residents perceived their lack of education in EBM, time constraints, lack of priority, and fear of staff disapproval as major challenges to practicing EBM. Moreover, the lack of ready access to surgical EBM resource materials proved to be an important additional factor limiting EBM surgical practice. Residents identified several strategies to overcome these barriers to EBM, including hiring staff surgeons with EBM training, offering coursework in critical appraisal for all staff, improving interdepartmental communication, and providing greater flexibility for EBM training. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical residents identified a general lack of education, time constraints, lack of priority, and staff disapproval as important factors limiting incorporation of EBM. Curriculum reform and surgeon education may help overcome these barriers.