Home
Resource
Implementing a screening tool for intimate partner violence to increase screening rates in primary care
PDF
PDF format is widely accepted and good for printing.
Plug-in required
PDF-1(449.81 kb)
Citation & Export
View Usage Statistics
Staff View

Citation & Export
Hide

Simple citation

Gomez-Brito, Iris Y.. Implementing a screening tool for intimate partner violence to increase screening rates in primary care. Retrieved from https://doi.org/doi:10.7282/t3-rx4d-2160

Export

Click here for information about Citation Management Tools at Rutgers.

Statistics
Hide

Description

TitleImplementing a screening tool for intimate partner violence to increase screening rates in primary care
NameGomez-Brito, Iris Y. (author); Heider, Gerti (chair); Lange, Ginette (internal member); Rutgers University; School of Nursing - RBHS
Date Created2021
Other Date2021-05 (degree)
SubjectIntimate partner violence, Women's Health/Nurse Midwifery
Extent1 online resource (36 pages)
DescriptionPurpose of Project
Due to underreporting, lack of recognition and screening from healthcare providers, intimate partner violence (IPV), and its wrath, easily goes unnoticed. Despite governments and professional organizations recommending IPV screening for all women (O’Doherty et al., 2015), screening rates have remained low. The emphasis of the quality improvement project depicted in this paper was to improve IPV screening rates in a primary care practice by introducing a standardized screening tool and protocol. The objectives of this DNP project were 1) to implement a screening tool for IPV and evaluate its effect on screening rates, 2) to establish a protocol and practice change for IPV screening, and 3) to inform best practice for IPV screening.

Methodology
Women 18 years of age and older without any mental disability that speak either English or Spanish and agreed to be screened in private were eligible for screening. The HITS screening toll was used to screen participants. All participants were provided with IPV resources information. The provider reviewed the screening tool during encounter with the patient and IPV screening was noted in the chart.

Results
Results showed that for the HITS score variable, the median was 4 and the mode was 4. For this variable, the variance was calculated to be 1.23, with a standard deviation of 1.11. IPV screening rates ranged from 30% to 60% during the implementation period, with an average of 41%.

Implications for Practice
Unfortunately, IPV screening rates at this practice did not reach the average expected goal of 50% after implementation of a standard screening tool and protocol. However, a 41% average IPV screening rate is a significant improvement from no accountable screening rate prior to execution of the project.
NoteDNP
NoteIncludes bibliographical references
Genretheses, ETD doctoral
Persistent URLhttps://doi.org/doi:10.7282/t3-rx4d-2160
LanguageEnglish
CollectionSchool of Nursing (RBHS) DNP Projects
Organization NameRutgers, The State University of New Jersey
RightsThe author owns the copyright to this work.
Version 8.5.5
Rutgers University Libraries - Copyright ©2024