Disclosing intimate partner violence to health care clinicians - What a difference the setting makes: A qualitative study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Despite endorsement by national organizations, the impact of screening for intimate partner violence (IPV) is understudied, particularly as it occurs in different clinical settings. We analyzed interviews of IPV survivors to understa...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Finley Erin, Battaglia Tracy, Liebschutz Jane, Averbuch Tali
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2008-07-01
Series:BMC Public Health
Online Access:http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2458/8/229
_version_ 1818001983982796800
author Finley Erin
Battaglia Tracy
Liebschutz Jane
Averbuch Tali
author_facet Finley Erin
Battaglia Tracy
Liebschutz Jane
Averbuch Tali
author_sort Finley Erin
collection DOAJ
description <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Despite endorsement by national organizations, the impact of screening for intimate partner violence (IPV) is understudied, particularly as it occurs in different clinical settings. We analyzed interviews of IPV survivors to understand the risks and benefits of disclosing IPV to clinicians across specialties.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Participants were English-speaking female IPV survivors recruited through IPV programs in Massachusetts. In-depth interviews describing medical encounters related to abuse were analyzed for common themes using Grounded Theory qualitative research methods. Encounters with health care clinicians were categorized by outcome (IPV disclosure by patient, discovery evidenced by discussion of IPV by clinician without patient disclosure, or non-disclosure), attribute (beneficial, unhelpful, harmful), and specialty (emergency department (ED), primary care (PC), obstetrics/gynecology (OB/GYN)).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Of 27 participants aged 18–56, 5 were white, 10 Latina, and 12 black. Of 59 relevant health care encounters, 23 were in ED, 17 in OB/GYN, and 19 in PC. Seven of 9 ED disclosures were characterized as unhelpful; the majority of disclosures in PC and OB/GYN were characterized as beneficial. There were no harmful disclosures in any setting. Unhelpful disclosures resulted in emotional distress and alienation from health care. Regardless of whether disclosure occurred, beneficial encounters were characterized by familiarity with the clinician, acknowledgement of the abuse, respect and relevant referrals.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>While no harms resulted from IPV disclosure, survivor satisfaction with disclosure is shaped by the setting of the encounter. Clinicians should aim to build a therapeutic relationship with IPV survivors that empowers and educates patients and does not demand disclosure.</p>
first_indexed 2024-04-14T03:41:07Z
format Article
id doaj.art-0962739cf3e347279f65facbf550fb6e
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1471-2458
language English
last_indexed 2024-04-14T03:41:07Z
publishDate 2008-07-01
publisher BMC
record_format Article
series BMC Public Health
spelling doaj.art-0962739cf3e347279f65facbf550fb6e2022-12-22T02:14:31ZengBMCBMC Public Health1471-24582008-07-018122910.1186/1471-2458-8-229Disclosing intimate partner violence to health care clinicians - What a difference the setting makes: A qualitative studyFinley ErinBattaglia TracyLiebschutz JaneAverbuch Tali<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Despite endorsement by national organizations, the impact of screening for intimate partner violence (IPV) is understudied, particularly as it occurs in different clinical settings. We analyzed interviews of IPV survivors to understand the risks and benefits of disclosing IPV to clinicians across specialties.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Participants were English-speaking female IPV survivors recruited through IPV programs in Massachusetts. In-depth interviews describing medical encounters related to abuse were analyzed for common themes using Grounded Theory qualitative research methods. Encounters with health care clinicians were categorized by outcome (IPV disclosure by patient, discovery evidenced by discussion of IPV by clinician without patient disclosure, or non-disclosure), attribute (beneficial, unhelpful, harmful), and specialty (emergency department (ED), primary care (PC), obstetrics/gynecology (OB/GYN)).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Of 27 participants aged 18–56, 5 were white, 10 Latina, and 12 black. Of 59 relevant health care encounters, 23 were in ED, 17 in OB/GYN, and 19 in PC. Seven of 9 ED disclosures were characterized as unhelpful; the majority of disclosures in PC and OB/GYN were characterized as beneficial. There were no harmful disclosures in any setting. Unhelpful disclosures resulted in emotional distress and alienation from health care. Regardless of whether disclosure occurred, beneficial encounters were characterized by familiarity with the clinician, acknowledgement of the abuse, respect and relevant referrals.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>While no harms resulted from IPV disclosure, survivor satisfaction with disclosure is shaped by the setting of the encounter. Clinicians should aim to build a therapeutic relationship with IPV survivors that empowers and educates patients and does not demand disclosure.</p>http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2458/8/229
spellingShingle Finley Erin
Battaglia Tracy
Liebschutz Jane
Averbuch Tali
Disclosing intimate partner violence to health care clinicians - What a difference the setting makes: A qualitative study
BMC Public Health
title Disclosing intimate partner violence to health care clinicians - What a difference the setting makes: A qualitative study
title_full Disclosing intimate partner violence to health care clinicians - What a difference the setting makes: A qualitative study
title_fullStr Disclosing intimate partner violence to health care clinicians - What a difference the setting makes: A qualitative study
title_full_unstemmed Disclosing intimate partner violence to health care clinicians - What a difference the setting makes: A qualitative study
title_short Disclosing intimate partner violence to health care clinicians - What a difference the setting makes: A qualitative study
title_sort disclosing intimate partner violence to health care clinicians what a difference the setting makes a qualitative study
url http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2458/8/229
work_keys_str_mv AT finleyerin disclosingintimatepartnerviolencetohealthcareclinicianswhatadifferencethesettingmakesaqualitativestudy
AT battagliatracy disclosingintimatepartnerviolencetohealthcareclinicianswhatadifferencethesettingmakesaqualitativestudy
AT liebschutzjane disclosingintimatepartnerviolencetohealthcareclinicianswhatadifferencethesettingmakesaqualitativestudy
AT averbuchtali disclosingintimatepartnerviolencetohealthcareclinicianswhatadifferencethesettingmakesaqualitativestudy