Hospital-based Violence Intervention Programs

Annotated Bibliography

Bonne, S., Hink, A., Violano, P., Allee, L., Duncan, T., Burke, P., … & Dicker, R. (2022). Understanding the makeup of a growing field: A committee on trauma survey of the national network of hospital-based violence intervention programs. The American Journal of Surgery, 223(1), 137-145. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S000296102100413X

Hospital-based Violence Intervention Programs

The article addresses hospital-based violence intervention programs, their implementation, and their effectiveness in addressing IPV. The authors identify the programmatic components of existing HAVI and assess program and service hurdles to implementation to inform the American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma (ACS-COT) on how trauma centers might collaborate on this project most effectively. The researchers discovered that hospital-based violence intervention programs successfully address IPV but struggle with funding, hiring enough staff, and gaining buy-in. The study offers insights into the implementation of HAVI programs and the factors that should be considered in the process. The findings are evidence-supported and consistent with other studies reviewed by the authors, enhancing their validity and reliability. However, there are limitations to the study. The sample size adopted in the study is inadequate and limits generalization. Also, only 38 participants, all HAVI members, were invited, resulting in a selection bias in the study. Future studies should concentrate on finding ways to increase HVIP implementation, funding, and data gathering. The article supports the intervention by providing information on how hospital-based violence intervention programs can prevent IPV and suggestions on how they can be made better.

Halliwell, G., Dheensa, S., Fenu, E., Jones, S. K., Asato, J., Jacob, S., & Feder, G. (2019). Cry for health: a quantitative evaluation of a hospital-based advocacy intervention for domestic violence and abuse. BMC health services research, 19(1), 1-12. https://bmchealthservres.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12913-019-4621-0

The authors explored hospital-based advocacy’s impact on home-based violence, including IPV. In addition to examining the impact on improving support access, health outcomes, and cost-effectiveness, the authors examined how an advocacy approach benefited domestic violence survivors in a hospital context. By working with survivors who were less obvious to community IDVA programs, hospital IDVAs helped with earlier intervention. The researchers found that hospital IDVAs increased referrals from medical services and made additional health resources accessible, and hospital survivors were more likely to report abuse reductions and cessations. However, for hospital survivors, there were no changes in health outcomes. In this case, hospital survivors’ odds of staying safe increased by a factor of two if they made more than five contacts with an IDVA or used at least six resources or programs over a more extended period and the cost of accessing services by survivors reduced. The methodology adopted supports the thesis and the research purpose, bolstering the quality of the research study. Also, the findings are reported in other studies reviewed in this article, implying consistent results, hence high reliability and validity. However, the evaluation design and the data quality had limitations. The researchers’ non-experimental methodology caused them to overstate the effectiveness of the intervention. The approaches employed to estimate cost also limited the analysis because it relied on patient collection. The effectiveness of the intervention should be the subject of further study, often using an experimental methodology. Nonetheless, the study supports the effectiveness of the hospital-based approaches as an intervention to addressing IPV by demonstrating with specificity the usefulness of hospital-based advocacy interventions for treating domestic violence and abuse.

Olson, C., Aboutanos, M., Thomson, N., Vincent, A., & Kevorkian, S. (2022). Adapting Hospital-based Intimate Partner Violence Programs to the COVID-19 Pandemic. Panamerican Journal of Trauma, Critical Care & Emergency Surgery, 11(1), 3-8. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Nicholas-Thomson-2/publication/360294052_Adapting_Hospital-based_Intimate_Partner_Violence_Programs_to_the_COVID-19_Pandemic/links/62a0e4b36886635d5cc9c908/Adapting-Hospital-based-Intimate-Partner-Violence-Programs-to-the-COVID-19-Pandemic.pdf

The author investigated how hospital-based advocacy programs or interventions have affected domestic violence during the Covid-19 pandemic. The researchers looked into how the EMPOWER program modified intervention and community case management procedures to assist patients during the pandemic. The findings indicate patients had access to a range of services through EMPOWER, including crisis intervention (84%), emotional support (89%), victim rights (53%), and advocacy for patients while they were undergoing medical treatment (49%). The victims noted the following dangers and risks: A total of 30% of patients reported the presenting domestic violence incident to the police, 19% of patients seeking advocacy services claimed the perpetrator used a weapon, including a firearm, against the victim, and 8% of patients were forced to move or become homeless as a result of domestic violence. The study depicts accurate findings of similar programs outside the study, demonstrating high validity and reliability. However, given that chosen patients are enrolled in the particular program or services, the study suggests a selection bias. Therefore, applying the findings outside of the research context would be challenging. Future studies should examine the program’s effectiveness and potential for expansion into other contexts. Despite the limitations, the article is relevant to the research paper because it offers insightful information about one illustration of a hospital-based intervention to deal with IPV and victims of violence.

Yount, K. M., Cheong, Y. F., Khan, Z., Bergenfeld, I., Kaslow, N., & Clark, C. J. (2022). Global measurement of intimate partner violence to monitor Sustainable Development Goal 5. BMC public health, 22(1), 1-14.

Authors seek to measure intimate partner violence to monitor sustainable development 5 (to eliminate violence against women, including IPV). This goal prompts states to monitor IPV to eliminate it successfully. The authors performed a measurement-invariance assessment of standardized IPV items. Data was collected through the Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS) from Lower-/Middle-Income Countries (LMICs). 18 IPV items were administered and analyzed on two item sets, lifetime physical IPV and controlling behaviors. The article’s findings indicate varying national physical IPV and controlling behavior rates. Also, both tests had similar national rankings based on prevalence. Physical IPV items, including slapping, twisting, chocking and controlling behaviors like meeting female friends and contacting family, warranted cognitive testing to enhance their psychometric properties. This article has high reliability and validity because the findings are consistent with those of other research articles reviewed in this article. The findings are related to the PICOT-D elements as they offer items to measure IPV. However, the results are limited to the seven selected physical-IPV and five controlling-behavior items analyzed. Therefore, these findings cannot be extended to other IPV items.

Troisi, G. (2018). Measuring intimate partner violence and traumatic affect: Development of VITA, an Italian scale. Frontiers in psychology, 9, 1282.

The authors investigate measurements for IPV and traumatic affect. The authors seek to develop and assess tools or instruments to identify post-traumatic affectivity. Developing these instruments would help IP victims and services recognize and respond to IPV with higher sensitivity and structure. The authors investigated a self-report instrument to detect post-traumatic affect intensity due to IPV. A 28-item set was identified and administered to 302 IPV victims. The article adopted explorative and confirmatory analysis to measure the items. Findings indicate that the instrument could help clinicians and researchers investigate the affective state intensity of IPV victims. It could help address clinical practice and therapeutic intervention planning. These findings are reported in other studies, increasing the reliability and validity of the article. The study is also relevant and supports the PICOT-D elements by providing insights into IPV and traumatic affect measurement. However, the tool does not consider the women’s emotional reaction’s complexity after trauma, and the sample was not entirely discriminant of a clinical sample.

References

Troisi, G. (2018). Measuring intimate partner violence and traumatic affect: Development of VITA, an Italian scale. Frontiers in psychology, 9, 1282.

Appendix A

Table 1: Primary Quantitative Research – Supports Element of PICOT-D Question

APA Reference (Include the GCU permalink or working link used to access the article.)

Research Questions/ Hypothesis, and Purpose/Aim of Study

Type of Primary Research Design

Research Methodology

· Setting/Sample (type, country, number of participants in study)

· Methods (instruments used; state if instruments can be used in the DPI Project)

· How were the data collected?

Interpretation of Data

(State p-value: acceptable range is p= 0.000 – p= 0.05)

Outcomes/
Key Findings(Succinctly states all study results applicable to the DPI Project.)

Limitations of Study and Biases

Recommendations for Future Research

Explanation of How the Article Supports Your Proposed PICOT-D Question (P.C.O.T or D)

https://bmcpublichealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12889-022-12822-9

The paper aimed to conduct the first robust, global psychometric evaluation of items established to measure IPV in the DHS DVM

Quantitative Descriptive Research

The researchers administered the Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS) to 36 lower-Middle-Income countries (LMICs) between 2012-2018. The surveys had 18 IPV items.

The surveys were administered to large, nationally-representative samples of households and randomly selected women of reproductive age (15-49 years).

National rates of physical IPV (5.6–50.5%) and controlling behavior (25.9–84.7%) varied.

The article’s findings indicate varying national physical IPV and controlling behavior rates. Also, both tests had similar national rankings based on prevalence. Physical IPV items, including slapping, twisting, chocking and controlling behaviors like meeting female friends and contacting family, warranted cognitive testing to enhance their psychometric properties.

The results are limited to the seven selected physical-IPV and five controlling-behavior items analyzed. Therefore, these findings cannot be extended to other IPV items.

The analyses should be replicated for high-income countries (HICs).

Future research surveys should be completed before or after (2012-2018).

Larger national samples would help future research minimize sampling errors and bolster statistical power.

The findings are related to the PICOT-D elements as they offer items to measure IPV.

Troisi, G. (2018). Measuring intimate partner violence and traumatic affect: Development of VITA, an Italian scale. Frontiers in psychology, 9, 1282. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01282/full

The study aimed to investigate measurements for IPV and traumatic affect and develop and assess tools or instruments to identify post-traumatic affectivity.

This study emphasizes emotional factors maintaining the violent relationship in particular guilt, shame, fear, and terror.

Correlational Quantitative Research Design

The sample included 32 Italian women (M: 30.63; SD: 18.5 years).

The recruitment was online, via mailing lists and social networks.

The participants were grouped randomly into two congruous subsamples, A and B.

A 28-item set was identified and administered.

The data was collected using the VITA Scale and the IPV Check List.

A factorial structure composed of four factors (guilt, shame, fear, and terror), consistent with theoretical scales and a good internal consistency (Cronbach’s alphas from 0.80 to 0.90) emerged

The authors investigated a self-report instrument to detect post-traumatic affect intensity due to IPV.

Findings indicate that the instrument could help clinicians and researchers investigate the affective state intensity of IPV victims. It could help address clinical practice and therapeutic intervention planning.

The tool does not consider the women’s emotional reaction’s complexity after trauma, and the sample was not entirely discriminant of a clinical sample.

A clinical sample should be adopted to confirm the results.

Future researcher should determine if the instrument is sensitive to changes in the therapeutic process with women who are IPV victims.

A more in-depth investigation of violence consequences for women’s emotional experience is needed to refine the scale’s content validity.

The study is relevant and supports the PICOT-D elements by providing insights into IPV and traumatic affect, including guilt, shame, fear, and terror, measurement.

Table 2: Primary Quantitative Research – Supports Intervention Directly

APA Reference (Include the GCU permalink or working link used to access the article.)	Research Questions/ Hypothesis, and Purpose/Aim of Study	Type of Primary Research Design	Research Methodology · Setting/Sample (type, country, number of participants in study) · Methods (instruments used; state if instruments can be used in the DPI Project) · How were the data collected?	Interpretation of Data (State p-value: acceptable range is p= 0.000 – p= 0.05)	Outcomes/ Key Findings(Succinctly states all study results applicable to the DPI Project.)	Limitations of Study and Biases	Recommendations for Future Research	Explanation of How the Article Supports the Intervention for Your Proposed PICOT-D Question
Bonne, S., Hink, A., Violano, P., Allee, L., Duncan, T., Burke, P., … & Dicker, R. (2022). Understanding the makeup of a growing field: A committee on trauma survey of the national network of hospital-based violence intervention programs. The American Journal of Surgery, 223(1), 137-145. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S000296102100413X	The study’s aim is to identify the programmatic components of existing HAVI programs and to understand program and service barriers to implementation, to inform the ACS-COT as to the best way trauma centers can partner in this work.	The study design adopted a survey provided by the American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma	Twenty-eight Health Alliance for Violence Intervention member programs participated in the survey. The survey instrument by the Hospital Based Violence Intervention Program was used to collect the data. The researchers submitted the survey via Qualtrics.	Well-funded programs received equal or over $300,000 every year and low-funded programs received less.	The researchers found that Hospital Based Violence Intervention program were effective in addressing IPV, but face funding, adequate staffing, and buy-in problems.	The sample size was small. The study had a selection bias as only 38 members were invited, all who were members of the HAVI.	Future research should focus on exploring opportunities to expand the implementation, funding, and data collection of HVIPs.	The article offers evidence on how hospital-based violence intervention program can help address IPV and insights into how these programs can be improved.
Halliwell, G., Dheensa, S., Fenu, E., Jones, S. K., Asato, J., Jacob, S., & Feder, G. (2019). Cry for health: a quantitative evaluation of a hospital-based advocacy intervention for domestic violence and abuse. BMC health services research, 19(1), 1-12. https://bmchealthservres.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12913-019-4621-0	The study aimed to explore how an advocacy approach supported domestic violence survivors in a hospital setting, explore impact on enhancing support access, health outcomes, and cost effectiveness.	Causal-Comparative research design	The researchers invited independent Domestic Violence Advisors (IDVA) in five UK hospitals. The researchers collected case-level data at initial referral and case closure from survivors accessing hospital (T1 N = 692; T2 N = 476) and community IDVA services (T1 N = 3544; T2 N = 2780).	Survivors who had accessed a hospital IDVA service were two times more likely to report feeling safer at case closure (AOR = 2.03, 95% CI 1.18 to 3.49) Accessing six or more resources / programmes increased safety by one and a half times AOR = 2.38, 95% CI 1.41 to 3.87) and odds of achieving this outcome increased progressively with a greater number of support days provided by the IDVA (AOR = 2.00, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.01). Survivors who had accessed a hospital IDVA service were more likely to report no change or feeling less safe at exit if they had experienced suicidal ideation or behaviors at the point of initial referral (AOR = 2.00, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.74). feelings of safety were increased in line with more intensive support in terms of more frequent contact with a community IDVA (AOR = 1.45, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.89) and access to a range of resources / programs (AOR = 1.82, 95% CI = 1.43 to 2.31)	Hospital IDVAs assisted with earlier intervention by working with survivors who were less noticeable to community IDVA programs. Hospital IDVAs enabled access to more health resources and saw an increase in referrals from medical services. Abuse reductions and cessations were more frequently reported by hospital survivors. In terms of health outcomes, there were no differences found for hospital survivors. If hospital survivors made more than five contacts with an IDVA or used at least six resources or programs over a longer period of time, their chances of remaining safe improved by a factor of two. Hospital survivors used healthcare services on average for £2463 each in the six months prior to IDVA intervention, while community survivors used healthcare services for £533 each.	Limitations were linked to the evaluation design and data quality. The researchers used a non-experimental design that led to an over-statement of intervention effectiveness. The resources used to estimate cost limited analysis because it was based on patient collection.	Further research should seek to determine the efficacy of the intervention, typically adopting an experimental design.	This study offers concrete evidence on the effectiveness of hospital-based advocacy intervention for addressing domestic violence and abuse.
Olson, C., Aboutanos, M., Thomson, N., Vincent, A., & Kevorkian, S. (2022). Adapting Hospital-based Intimate Partner Violence Programs to the COVID-19 Pandemic. Panamerican Journal of Trauma, Critical Care & Emergency Surgery, 11(1), 3-8. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Nicholas-Thomson-2/publication/360294052_Adapting_Hospital-based_Intimate_Partner_Violence_Programs_to_the_COVID-19_Pandemic/links/62a0e4b36886635d5cc9c908/Adapting-Hospital-based-Intimate-Partner-Violence-Programs-to-the-COVID-19-Pandemic.pdf	The aim of the study is exploring the impact of a hospital-based advocacy program or intervention on intimate partner violence during the Covid-19 pandemic. The researchers investigated the EMPOWER program and how it adapted intervention and community case management practices to serve patients during the Pandemic.	Descriptive research design	67 enrollees in the services participated in the study. The researchers evaluated EMPOWER case logs on remote crisis intervention, safety planning, ongoing counselling, case management, and community-based referrals.	Victimization types identified included IPV (61%), physical assault (40%), and sexual violence (35%). Around 28% of patients had a prior history of IPV or DV. Around 49% of patients were assaulted by their partner/spouse, 41% were assaulted while on a date	Through EMPOWER, patients were given access to a variety of services, such as crisis intervention (84%), emotional support (89%), victim rights (53%), and advocacy for patients while they were receiving medical treatment (49%). The following safety and risk factors were mentioned by victims: Domestic violence caused 8% of patients to move or become homeless, 19% of patients seeking advocacy services claimed the perpetrator utilized a weapon, including a firearm, against the victim, and 30% of patients reported the presenting domestic violence incident to the police.	The paper does not discuss limitations to the study. Based on the analysis, a selection bias is likely given that selected patients are enrollees to the specific program or services, and it would be difficult to generalize the results outside the research setting.	Future research should seek to determine the effectiveness of the program and how it can be adopted in other settings.	The study provides valuable insights into an example of a hospital-based intervention to address IPV and victims of violence.

Hospital-based Violence Intervention Programs