Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T23:07:11.006Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Caring for victims of intimate partner violence: a survey of Canadian emergency departments

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 May 2015

Sarah McClennan ,
Andrew Worster  and
Harriet MacMillan
Sarah McClennan*
Affiliation:
Division of Emergency Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ont.
Andrew Worster
Affiliation:
Division of Emergency Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ont.
Harriet MacMillan
Affiliation:
Departments of Psychiatry and Behavioural Neurosciences, and Pediatrics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ont.
*
Division of Emergency Medicine, McMaster University, Rm. 2Q15B, 1200 Main St. W, Hamilton ON L8N 3Z5; mcclensk@mcmaster.ca

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Objective:

We sought to determine the proportion of Canadian emergency departments (EDs) that have intimate partner violence (IPV) universal screening programs and intervention policies and procedures. Of the EDs with programs, we determined what proportion had made changes in their practices during the past 10 years and since the 2003 Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care recommendations.

Methods:

Using the same sampling methods as a 1994 study, we mailed questionnaires to nurse managers of a stratified, random sample of 250 out of 638 (39%) Canadian EDs and followed up with a series of telephone calls.

Results:

Of the 250 EDs initially contacted, 6 were excluded before the surveys were mailed. The response rate was 78.3% (191/244). Sixty-one (31.9%) of the studied EDs reported the existence of IPV policies and procedures. In this group, 26 (42.6%) applied universal screening and 13 (21.3%) implemented their screening policies after the 2003 national recommendations were published. When these results were compared with those of the 1994 study, there was no difference in the proportion of EDs with IPV policies and procedures or in the proportion of EDs that applied universal screening.

Conclusion:

Despite increased research into IPV there was no significant change between 1994 and 2004 in the existence of IPV polices or universal screening in Canadian EDs. Policies and procedures that address appropriate responses to patients exposed to IPV should be a priority, with most emphasis directed toward developing effective interventions to which women can be referred.

Keywords

intimate partner violencedomestic violencescreeningemergency departmentemergency medicinepolicies
Type
Original Research • Recherche originale
Information
Canadian Journal of Emergency Medicine , Volume 10 , Issue 4 , July 2008 , pp. 325 - 328
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians 2008

References

1.Swanson, L. Abuse against women a public health issue: MD. CMAJ 2000;162:848.Google Scholar
2.McLeer, SV, Anwar, R. A study of battered women presenting in an emergency department. Am J Public Health 1989;79:65–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3.Clark, JP, Du Mont, J. Intimate partner violence and health: a critique of Canadian prevalence studies. Can J Public Health 2003;94:52–8.Google Scholar
4.Abbott, P, Williamson, E. Women, health and domestic violence. J Gend Stud 1999;8:83–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5.Muelleman, RL, Feighny, KM. Effects of an emergency department-based advocacy program for battered women on community resource utilization. Ann Emerg Med 1999;33:62–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6.Dearwater, SR, Coben, JH, Campbell, JC, et al. Prevalence of intimate partner violence in women treated at community hospital emergency departments. JAMA 1998;280:433–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7.Ernst, AA, Nick, TG, Weiss, SJ, et al. Domestic violence in an innercity ED. Ann Emerg Med 1997;30:190–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8.Statistics Canada. Family violence in Canada. Ottawa (ON): Statistics Canada; 1994.Google Scholar
9.Morrison, LJ, Allan, R, Grunfeld, A. Improving the emergency department detection rate of domestic violence using direct questioning. J Emerg Med 2000;19:117–24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10.Glass, N, Dearwater, S, Campbell, J. Intimate partner violence screening and intervention: data from eleven Pennsylvania and California community hospital emergency departments. J Emerg Nurs 2001;27:141–9.Google Scholar
11.Wathen, CN, MacMillan, HL. Interventions for violence against women: scientific review. JAMA 2003;289:589–600.Google Scholar
12.Cole, TB. Is domestic violence screening helpful? JAMA 2000;284:551–3.Google Scholar
13.Wathen, CN. MacMillan HL and the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care. Prevention of violence against women: recommendation statement from the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care. CMAJ 2003;169:582–4.Google Scholar
14.US Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for family and intimate partner violence: recommendation statement. Ann Fam Med 2004;2:156–60.Google Scholar
15.Hotch, D, Grunfeld, A, Mackay, K, et al. Policy and procedures for domestic violence patients in Canadian emergency departments: a national survey. J Emerg Nurs 1996;22:278–82.Google Scholar
16.Anglin, D, Sachs, C. Preventive care in the emergency department: screening for domestic violence in the emergency department. Acad Emerg Med 2003;10:1118–27.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed