التفاصيل البيبلوغرافية
| العنوان: |
Identifying the barriers faced by obstetricians and registrars in screening or enquiry of intimate partner violence in pregnancy: A systematic review of the primary evidence. |
| المؤلفون: |
Lu, Corrine, Georgousopoulou, Ekavi, Baloch, Surriya, Walton‐Sonda, Dianne, Hegarty, Kelsey, Sethna, Farah, Brown, Nick A.T. |
| المصدر: |
Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology; Feb2024, Vol. 64 Issue 1, p19-27, 9p |
| مصطلحات موضوعية: |
ONLINE information services, HOSPITAL medical staff, OBSTETRICIANS, SYSTEMATIC reviews, RESEARCH methodology, ATTITUDES of medical personnel, TIME, MEDICAL screening, INTERVIEWING, INTIMATE partner violence, SURVEYS, PSYCHOSOCIAL factors, QUESTIONNAIRES, DESCRIPTIVE statistics, PRENATAL care, MEDLINE, THEMATIC analysis, CULTURAL prejudices, VALUES (Ethics), OUTPATIENT services in hospitals |
| مستخلص: |
Introduction: Intimate partner violence (IPV) disproportionally affects women compared to men. The impact of IPV is amplified during pregnancy. Screening or enquiry in the antenatal outpatient setting regarding IPV has been fraught with barriers that prevent recognition and the ability to intervene. Aims: The aim of this systematic review was to determine the barriers that face obstetricians/gynaecologists regarding enquiry of IPV in antenatal outpatient settings. The secondary objective was to determine facilitators. Methods: Primary evidence was searched using Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Maternity and Infant Care, PubMed and Proquest from 1993 to May 2023. The included studies comprised empirical studies published in English language targeting a population of doctors providing antenatal outpatient care. The review was PROSPERO‐registered (CRD42020188994). Independent screening and review was performed by two authors. The findings were analysed thematically. Results: Nine studies addressing barriers and two studies addressing facilitators were included: three focus‐group or semi‐structured interviews, six surveys and two randomised controlled trials. Barriers for providers centred at the system level (time, training), provider level (personal beliefs, cultural bias, experience) and provider‐perceived patient level (fear of offending, patient readiness to disclose). Increased experience and the use of validated tools were strong facilitators. Conclusion: Barriers to screening reflect multi‐level obstruction to the identification of women exposed to IPV. Although the antenatal outpatient clinic setting addresses a particular population vulnerable to IPV, the barriers for obstetricians are not unique. The use of validated cueing tools provides an evidence‐based method to facilitate enquiry of IPV among antenatal women, assisting in identification by clinicians. Together with education and human resources, such aids build capacity in women and obstetric providers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|
Copyright of Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) |
| قاعدة البيانات: |
Complementary Index |
Full Text Finder