Designing an integrated program for intimate partner violence screening and referral at a hospital trauma service in Alberta, Canada
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Intimate partner violence (IPV) is the primary cause of serious injury and the second leading cause of death among women of reproductive age in Canada. Alberta has one of the highest rates of IPV in Canada. Health systems play a crucial role in providing services for IPV. It is widely recommended to integrate IPV services into trauma services to improve outcomes for patients admitted with severe IPV injuries. For example, having a dedicated IPV expert, such as a peer advocate worker or social worker on the trauma team, will help patients experiencing IPV get the support they need to avoid further harm. Approach: The University of Alberta Hospital (UAH) has a large trauma population at risk for IPV and is currently without a standardized screening protocol, resources to appropriately screen, and trained IPV personnel to provide resources for safety planning, mental health support, and referral to community-based IPV services. Our team has collected evidence on effective IPV screening practices and identified the determinants of successfully implementing integrated IPV response services in trauma care. We gathered qualitative feedback from trauma providers and IPV survivors to design a comprehensive screening program that includes a dedicated IPV expert on the trauma team, referral to community-based resources, and educational sessions for hospital staff delivered by community IPV collaborators. Results: Consistent with a social-ecological analysis and implementation science, we identified the factors that would enable the successful implementation of integrated IPV services at the UAH trauma service. In the wider community context, we have engaged with community agencies and Indigenous knowledge experts, including the UAH Indigenous Liaison, to develop a referral protocol to community-based IPV resources that is sensitive to survivors needs, particularly within specific cultural groups such as Indigenous patients. Within the UAH trauma service itself, our site champion, a trauma surgeon, has engaged UAH leadership to support the initiative. We propose hiring a peer advocate worker to administer IPV screening using a validated screening tool. Having dedicated personnel to support screening, assessment, and referral addresses trauma providers time constraints and capacity to respond to IPV. At the micro level, the peer-advocate worker will establish rapport with patients, assess risk and protective factors, educate patients about IPV, and provide direct connections to community resources and follow-up. Implications: We investigated the factors that impact the successful implementation of an integrated IPV program at the UAH trauma service. These factors guided the development of an IPV screening and referral program at the UAH trauma service, and we have submitted a funding proposal to support its implementation. Our research advances knowledge aligned with the nine pillars of integrated care, namely, supporting an integrated workforce for IPV response in the health system and promoting survivor-centred care by improving trauma patients connection to IPV resources and community supports. Peer-advocate workers also support care coordination around patient needs and preferences. For the healthcare system, breaking the cycle of violence can reduce trauma recidivism and repeat presentations to hospitals for acute injuries and potentially prevent death from ongoing IPV.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,007 | 0,008 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,012 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,006 | 0,005 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,006 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».