Intimate Partner Violence Survivors' Unmet Social Service Needs
In: Journal of social service research, Band 37, Heft 5, S. 481-489
ISSN: 1540-7314
6 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Journal of social service research, Band 37, Heft 5, S. 481-489
ISSN: 1540-7314
In: Family court review: publ. in assoc. with: Association of Family and Conciliation Courts, Band 50, Heft 1, S. 150-158
ISSN: 1744-1617
Every day, judges are faced with decisions regarding intimate partner violence (IPV) victims' requests for protection orders, custody arrangements, and visitation schedules. To make informed decisions, judges must understand victims' risk for future violence. This mixed method study explores the extent to which protection order petitions (n = 169) communicate victims' current danger and future risk of violence. Methods included interviews coupled with an archival review of court petitions. Findings suggest judges are inadequately prepared to render decisions to improve victim safety in the absence of standardized risk assessments. The Danger Assessment provides an evidence‐based solution to routinize intake interviews with victims petitioning the court.Key Points for the Family Court Community:
Court personnel should ask petitioners specific questions regarding risk factors when drafting protection orders.
The Danger Assessment is an evidenced based tool that could be used to standardize intake interviews with individuals petitioning the court for protection orders.
Information regarding risk factors will help judges issue more informed protection orders and increase petitioner safety.
In: Journal of family violence, Band 25, Heft 5, S. 485-493
ISSN: 1573-2851
Objective: With 42% of all emergency department visits in the United States related to pain, physicians who work in this setting are tasked with providing adequate pain management to patients with varying primary complaints and medical histories. Complicating this, the United States is in the midst of an opioid overdose epidemic. State governments and national organizations have developed guidelines and legislation to curtail opioid prescriptions in acute care settings, while also incentivizing providers for patient satisfaction and completeness of pain control. In order to inform future policies that focus on provider pain medication prescribing, we sought to characterize the factors physicians weigh when considering treating pain with opioids in the emergency department. Methods: We conducted and transcribed open-ended, semistructured qualitative interviews with 52 physicians at a national emergency medicine conference. Results: Participants reported a wide range of factors contributing to their opioid prescribing patterns related to three domains: 1) provider assessment of pain characteristics, 2) patient-based considerations, and 3) practice environment. Pain characteristics include the characteristics of various acute and chronic pain syndromes, including physicians' empathy due to their own experiences with pain. Patient characteristics include "trustworthiness," race and ethnicity, and the concern for risk of misuse. Factors related to the practice environment include hospital policy, legislation/regulation, and guidelines. Conclusion: The decision to prescribe opioids to patients in the emergency department is complex and nuanced. Physicians are interested in guidance and are concerned about the competing pressures placed on their opioid prescribing due to incentives related to patient satisfaction scores on one hand and inflexible policies that do not allow for individualized, patient-centered decisions on the other.
BASE
In: Journal of family violence, Band 30, Heft 1, S. 75-83
ISSN: 1573-2851
In: Medical care research and review, Band 75, Heft 5, S. 633-650
ISSN: 1552-6801
Coverage and access have improved under the Affordable Care Act, yet it is unclear whether recent gains have reached those regions within states that were most in need of improved access to care. We examined geographic variation in Medicaid acceptance among Michigan primary care practices before and after Medicaid expansion in the state, using data from a simulated patient study of primary care practices. We used logistic regression analysis with time indicators to assess regional changes in Medicaid acceptance over time. Geographic regions with lower baseline (<50%) Medicaid acceptance had significant increases in Medicaid acceptance at 4 and 8 months post-expansion, while regions with higher baseline (≥50%) Medicaid acceptance did not experience significant changes in Medicaid acceptance. As state Medicaid expansions continue to be implemented across the country, policy makers should consider the local dynamics of incentives for provider participation in Medicaid.