Child Protective Services Reports in the Context of Intimate Partner Violence: A Delphi Process Examining Best Practices.

OBJECTIVES: Child protective services (CPS) reporting for families experiencing intimate partner violence (IPV) is complex. The goal of this study was to develop expert-driven best practices for pediatric providers filing CPS reports in the context of IPV. METHODS: We conducted a Delphi study with experts in IPV and child abuse and neglect (CAN) through 3 rounds of surveys. In Round 1, participants selected clinical scenarios for which they would file, as well as best practices when CPS reporting is indicating. In Round 2, participants described how strongly they agreed that a provider should file for each clinical scenario and how important each best practice was on a 5-point Likert scale. Finally, in Round 3 participants reviewed Round 1 and 2 results, then reported their final determination by selecting yes or no for each option. Consensus was achieved in Round 3 if >80% of participants agreed. In each round, participants could provide further detail via free-text answers. RESULTS: Twenty-three (40%) of the invited experts participated. Consensus was not achieved for children directly witnessing IPV or experiencing health symptoms due to IPV exposure. Participants were in consensus regarding need for CPS reporting when CAN was present and that reporting should not occur for exposure to IPV only. Best practices included supporting IPV survivors, developing healthcare-based IPV advocacy programs, and optimizing the child welfare system. CONCLUSION: This study provides expert-driven recommendations for filing CPS reports in the context of IPV and highlights the inherent complexity of filing and the need for further guidelines.

Injuries Suggestive of Physical Abuse in Young Children With Subconjunctival Hemorrhages.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the demographic characteristics, clinical presentations, medical evaluation, and injuries identified in a cohort of children with and without subconjunctival hemorrhage who were evaluated by a child abuse specialist. METHODS: This was a case-control study that used data from the ExSTRA (Examining Siblings to Recognize Abuse) research network. Subjects with a subconjunctival hemorrhage(s) were designated as cases. Four controls matched for age and participating center were included for each case. Descriptive statistics were used to compare cases and controls. RESULTS: Fifty of the 2890 subjects in the parent study had a subconjunctival hemorrhage(s) and were designated as cases. The cases had a median (interquartile range) age of 5.0 months (2.0-23.6 months). Two hundred controls were matched to the cases. There was no difference in the demographics, clinical characteristics, medical evaluation, or rate of occult injuries identified in cases and controls. Almost one-quarter of children with subconjunctival hemorrhages had no other external sign of trauma but had the same rate of occult injuries as children with bruises. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that subconjunctival hemorrhages are relatively rare among children undergoing evaluation by a child abuse specialist, but that they are often an indicator of occult injury. Even in the absence of other external signs of trauma, the presence of subconjunctival hemorrhages should prompt an age-appropriate evaluation for physical abuse.