JABFM
HOME HELP CONTACT US SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Rapid Responses: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when Rapid Responses are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Clark, D. W.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Clark, D. W.

The Journal of the American Board of Family Practice, Vol 14, Issue 4 252-258, Copyright © 2001 by American Board of Family Practice


ARTICLES

Domestic violence screening, policies, and procedures in Indian health service facilities

D. W. Clark
USPHS Albuquerque Indian Health Service Hospital, and University of New Mexico, USA.

BACKGROUND: Research shows that domestic violence against women in the United States is common, and the prevalence of domestic violence is high among Native American women. Victims of domestic violence can benefit from appropriate office intervention and referral. This study examined the effect of administrative and legal requirements on screening for domestic violence in Indian Health Service (IHS) hospitals and clinics. METHODS: A questionnaire was mailed using the total design method to all IHS hospitals and clinics regarding activities related to domestic violence: screening; policies and procedures; presence of committees; staff training; and state and tribal mandatory reporting requirements. RESULTS: The response rate was 65%. Eighty-eight (62%) of 142 facilities screen for domestic violence. A facility was more likely to screen if it had policies and procedures for domestic violence. Ninety-one (64%) of sites had policies and procedures for domestic violence. Less than one half these sites evaluated the use of these policies and procedures. Hospitals were more likely to have policies and procedures than clinics, as were sites administered by the IHS, rather than those administered by tribal contract. Fifty-eight (40.8%) facilities indicated 18 states have mandatory domestic violence reporting requirements. Thirty-three (23.2%) facilities indicated 31 different tribes mandate reporting of domestic violence. Forty-two (29.6%) facilities reported mandatory staff training in at least one topic related to domestic violence in the past year. CONCLUSIONS: Domestic violence policies and procedures promote screening for this important health care problem.





HOME HELP CONTACT US SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2001 by the American Board of Family Medicine.