Despite increasing implementation of health care-based screening for intimate partner violence (IPV) victimization, there is little focus and evidence-base to inform practice and policy for IPV perpetration. Yet patients and health care providers tend to agree on many elements of how to effectively screen for IPV perpetration, a new study by Yale Psychiatry researchers concludes.
The study, recently published in BMC Health Services Research, identified barriers, facilitators, and implementation preferences among patients and providers at the United States Veterans Health Administration (VHA).
“Although screening for IPV victimization is essential to providing support and follow up care for survivors of violence, just screening those who experience IPV is insufficient given IPV’s scope and far-reaching consequences,” said lead author Galina A. Portnoy, PhD, Associate Research Scientist in Psychiatry.
“Preventing IPV requires identifying those who use violence in relationships, and connecting them with effective treatment that targets preventing future violent behavior,” Portnoy said.
The study conducted qualitative interviews with patients and focus groups with providers across disciplines to identify barriers, facilitators, and implementation preferences for comprehensive IPV screening, specifically screening for IPV perpetration.
Although screening for IPV victimization is essential to providing support and follow up care for survivors of violence, just screening those who experience IPV is insufficient given IPV’s scope and far-reaching consequences.
Galina A. Portnoy, PhD, Associate Research Scientist in Psychiatry
Patients and providers agreed on several key components to effective IPV screening, including strong rapport, clear and comprehensive processes and procedures, universal implementation of screening, and a self-report screening tool that assesses for both IPV use and experiences concurrently.
“However, there was little consensus on the appropriate setting for IPV perpetration screening, suggesting that future research should focus on identifying which health care settings would be most effective for comprehensive IPV screening implementation,” Portnoy said.
The study’s findings extend prior research on provider and patient perspectives on screening for IPV experiences and are especially timely for VHA.
The researchers noted that “the VHA is the largest integrated health care system in the US, and as such, it has the potential to develop, implement, and disseminate acceptable practices for comprehensively identifying and addressing IPV as well as serve as a model of care for other healthcare settings.”