Citation

Investigators P. J. Inj. Violence Res. 2017; 9(1): e793.

Affiliation

Department of Clinical Epidemiology & Biostatistics, McMaster University, Ontario, Canada. Email: maddenk@mcmaster.ca.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2017, Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences)

DOI

10.5249/jivr.v9i1.793

PMID

28039685

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Many organizations have conducted IPV informational campaigns, but the extent to which such cost-effective, simple changes to the clinic environment can improve patient perceptions about IPV is largely unknown. Our primary objective was to determine how an IPV informational program affects patients' perceptions about discussing IPV in a fracture clinic setting.

METHODS: We conducted a pre-post intervention study to evaluate the impacts of an IPV informational program on patients' perceptions and willingness to discuss IPV in an orthopaedic fracture clinic setting. During the intervention phase, there were posters and brochures in each bed area and several places in the waiting area, and the surgeons received a button to wear on their lab coat stating their openness to discuss IPV and a set of instructions on how to ask patients about IPV and refer them to resources.

RESULTS: A total of 160 patients (80 pre-intervention and 80 post-intervention) have participated in this study. Overall perception of the clinic as an open place in which to discuss IPV did not change as a result of the informational program compared to the control setting. However, more patients exposed to posters and information about IPV believed the clinic staff possessed resources to help IPV victims compared to the control group; however, this difference did not reach statistical significance (62% vs. 53%, respectively, p=0.29).

CONCLUSIONS: Passive interventions may serve an adjunctive role in facilitating active interventions in a clinic environment, but should not be considered in isolation as an effective approach.

© 2017 KUMS, All rights reserved.

Language: en