Bystander intervention to prevent firearm injury: A qualitative study of 4-H shooting sports participants.

This qualitative study examines how youth and adult members of 4-H Shooting Sports clubs perceive firearm injury risk and risk reduction, and the applicability of a bystander intervention (BI) risk reduction framework in this community. Semistructured interviews were conducted with 11 youth and 13 adult members of 4-H Shooting Sports clubs across nine US states from March to December of 2021 until thematic saturation was reached. Deductive and inductive thematic qualitative analyses were performed. Six overarching themes emerged: (1) The tendency to view firearm injury as predominantly unintentional in nature; (2) Acknowledgment of a wide array of risks for firearm injury; (3) Perceived barriers to bystander action to prevent firearm injury including knowledge, confidence, and consequences of action; (4) Facilitators of bystander action including a sense of civic responsibility; (5) Direct and indirect strategies to address potential risks for firearm injury; and (6) Belief that BI skills training would be useful for 4-H Shooting Sports. Findings lay the groundwork for applying BI skills training as an approach to firearm injury prevention in 4-H Shooting Sports, similar to how BI has been applied to other types of injury (i.e., sexual assault). 4-H Shooting Sports club members' sense of civic responsibility is a key facilitator. Prevention efforts should attend to the broad array of ways in which firearm injury occurs, including suicide, mass shootings, homicide, and intimate partner violence, as well as unintentional injury.

How to ask: Surveying nursing directors of nursing homes.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Nursing home research may involve eliciting information from managers, yet response rates for Directors of Nursing have not been recently studied. As a part of a more extensive study, we surveyed all nursing homes in three states in 2018 and 2019, updating how to survey these leaders effectively. We focus on response rates as a measure of non-response error and comparison of nursing home's characteristics to their population values as a measure of representation error. METHODS: We surveyed Directors of Nursing or their designees in nursing homes serving adult residents with at least 30 beds in California, Massachusetts, and Ohio (N = 2389). We collected contact information for respondents and then emailed survey invitations and links, followed by three email reminders and a paper version. Nursing home associations in two of the states contacted their members on our behalf. We compared the response rates across waves and states. We also compared the characteristics of nursing homes based on whether the response was via email or paper. In a multivariable logit regression, we used characteristics of the survey and the nursing homes to predict whether their DON responded to the survey using adjustments for multiple comparisons. RESULTS: The response rate was higher for the first wave than for the second (30% vs 20.5%). The highest response rate was in Massachusetts (31.8%), followed by Ohio (25.8%) and California (19.5%). Nursing home characteristics did not vary by response mode. Additionally, we did not find any statistically significant predictors of whether a nursing home responded. CONCLUSION: A single-mode survey may provide a reasonably representative sample at the cost of sample size. With that said, however, switching modes can increase sample size without potentially biasing the sample.

Validation of the Workplace Integrated Safety and Health (WISH) assessment in a sample of nursing homes using Item Response Theory (IRT) methods.

OBJECTIVES: To validate and test the dimensionality of six constructs from the Workplace Integrated Safety and Health (WISH) assessment, an instrument that assesses the extent to which organisations implement integrated systems approaches for protecting and promoting worker health, safety and well-being, in a sample of nursing homes in the USA. DESIGN: Validation of an assessment scale using data from a cross-sectional survey. SETTING: Nursing homes certified by the Centers for Medicaid and Medicare services in three states of the USA: Ohio, California and Massachusetts. PARTICIPANTS: 569 directors of nursing from nursing homes serving adults and with more than 30 beds participated in the study. RESULTS: Graded response Item Response Theory (IRT) models showed that five out of six constructs were unidimensional based on balanced interpretation of model fit statistics-M2 or C2 with p value >0.05, Comparative Fit Index >0.95, lower bound of the root mean squared error of approximation 90% CI <0.06 and standardised root mean square residual <0.08. Overall measure and construct reliability ranged from acceptable to good. Category boundary location parameters indicated that items were most informative for respondents in lower range of latent scores (ie, ß1, ß2, ß3 typically below 0). A few items were recommended to be dropped from future administrations of the instrument based on empirical and substantive interpretation. CONCLUSIONS: The WISH instrument has utility to understand to what extent organisations integrate protection and promotion of worker health, safety and well-being; however, it is most informative in organisations that present lower scores.