Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://anrows.intersearch.com.au/anrowsjspui/handle/1/16813 Record ID: 41134527-f446-40ea-9747-b7dff5f2b46f
Full metadata record
| DC Field | Value | Language |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.author | Schemitsch, Emil H | en |
| dc.contributor.author | Bhandari, Mohit | en |
| dc.contributor.author | Sprague, Sheila | en |
| dc.contributor.author | Madden, Kim | en |
| dc.contributor.author | Dosanjh, Sonia | en |
| dc.contributor.author | Petrisor, Brad | en |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2022-06-30T23:28:30Z | - |
| dc.date.available | 2022-06-30T23:28:30Z | - |
| dc.date.issued | 2012 | en |
| dc.identifier.citation | 27 (5), March 2012 | en |
| dc.identifier.issn | 0886-2605 | en |
| dc.identifier.uri | https://anrows.intersearch.com.au/anrowsjspui/handle/1/16813 | - |
| dc.language | en | en |
| dc.publisher | Sage Publications | en |
| dc.subject | Measurement | en |
| dc.subject | Screening | en |
| dc.title | Screening for intimate partner violence in orthopedic patients: a comparison of three screening tools | en |
| dc.title.alternative | Journal of interpersonal violence | en |
| dc.type | Journal Article | en |
| dc.identifier.catalogid | 360 | en |
| dc.subject.keyword | International | en |
| dc.subject.keyword | new_record | en |
| dc.subject.keyword | Journal article/research paper | en |
| dc.description.notes | Accurately identifying victims of intimate partner violence (IPV) can be a challenge for clinicians and clinical researchers. Multiple instruments have been developed and validated to identify IPV in patients presenting to health care practitioners, including the Woman Abuse Screening Tool (WAST) and the Partner Violence Screen (PVS). The purpose of the current study is to determine if female patients attending an outpatient orthopaedic fracture clinic who screen positive for IPV using three direct questions (direct questioning) also screen positive on the WAST and PVS.<br/ ><br/ >We conducted a prevalence study at two Level I trauma centres to determine the prevalence of IPV in female patients presenting to orthopaedic fracture clinics for treatment of injuries. We used three methods to determine the prevalence of IPV; 1) direct questioning, 2) WAST, and 3) PVS. We compared the prevalence rates across the three screening tools.<br/ ><br/ >Ninety-four women screened positive for IPV using any method. The prevalence of IPV was 30.5% when a direct questioning approach was utilized, 12.4% using the WAST, and 9.2% using the PVS. The WAST identified 37.2% (35/94) of the IPV victims detected and the PVS identified 27.7% (53/94) of the IPV victims detected, whereas direct questioning identified 89.4% of the IPV victims.<br/ ><br/ ><br/ >[?2012 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. For further information, visit <a href=" http://www.sagepub.com/journalsProdManSub.nav?prodId=Journal200855" target="_blank">SAGE Publications link</a>.] | en |
| dc.identifier.source | Journal of interpersonal violence | en |
| dc.date.entered | 2012-05-14 | en |
| Appears in Collections: | Journal Articles | |
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
Items in ANROWS library are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.