No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

IMPORTANCE Violence is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality among youth, with more than 700 000 emergency department (ED) visits annually for assault-related injuries. The risk for violent reinjury among high-risk, assault-injured youth is poorly understood. OBJECTIVE To compare recidivism for violent injury and mortality outcomes among drug-using, assault-injured youth (AI group) and drug-using, non–assault-injured control participants (non-AI group) presenting to an urban ED for care. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Participants were enrolled in a prospective cohort study from December 2, 2009, through September 30, 2011, at an urban level I ED and followed up for 24 months. We administered validated measures of violence and substance use and mental health diagnostic interviews and reviewed medical records at baseline and at each point of follow-up (6, 12, 18, and 24 months). EXPOSURE Follow-up over 24 months. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Use of ED services for assault or mortality measured from medical record abstraction supplemented with self-report. RESULTS We followed 349 AI and 250 non-AI youth for 24 months. Youth in the AI group had almost twice the risk for a violent injury requiring ED care within 2 years compared with the non-AI group (36.7% vs 22.4%; relative risk [RR], 1.65 [95% CI, 1.25-2.14]; P < .001). Two-year mortality was 0.8%. Poisson regression modeling identified female sex (RR, 1.30 [95% CI, 1.02-1.65]), assault-related injury (RR, 1.57 [95% CI, 1.19-2.04), diagnosis of a drug use disorder (RR, 1.29 [95% CI, 1.01-1.65]), and posttraumatic stress disorder (RR, 1.47 [95% CI, 1.09-1.97]) at the index visit as predictive of ED recidivism or death within 24 months. Parametric survival models demonstrated that assault-related injury (P < .001), diagnosis of posttraumatic stress disorder (P = .008), and diagnosis of a drug use disorder (P = .03) significantly shortened the expected waiting time until the first ED return visit for violence or death. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Violent injury is a reoccurring disease, with one-third of our AI group experiencing another violent injury requiring ED care within 2 years of the index visit, almost twice the rate of a non-AI comparison group. Secondary violence prevention measures addressing substance use and mental health needs are needed to decrease subsequent morbidity and mortality due to violence in the first 6 months after an assault injury.

Evaluation of the SafERteens intervention 1 year after an ED visit provides support for the efficacy of computer-assisted therapist brief intervention for reducing peer violence.

No abstract

The risk for firearm violence among high-risk youth after treatment for an assault is unknown.

Firearm injury is a leading cause of injury-related morbidity and mortality in the United States. We sought to systematically identify and summarize existing literature on clinical firearm injury prevention screening and interventions. We conducted a systematic search of PubMed, Web of Science, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), PsycInfo, and ClinicalTrials.gov for English-language original research (published 1992–2014) on clinical screening methods, patient-level firearm interventions, or patient/provider attitudes on the same. Unrelated studies were excluded through title, abstract, and full-text review, and the remaining articles underwent data abstraction and quality scoring. Of a total of 3,260 unique titles identified, 72 were included in the final review. Fifty-three articles examined clinician attitudes/practice patterns; prior training, experience, and expectations correlated with clinicians' regularity of firearm screening. Twelve articles assessed patient interventions, of which 6 were randomized controlled trials. Seven articles described patient attitudes; all were of low methodological quality. According to these articles, providers rarely screen or counsel their patients—even high-risk patients—about firearm safety. Health-care–based interventions may increase rates of safe storage of firearms for pediatric patients, suicidal patients, and other high-risk groups. Some studies show that training clinicians can increase rates of effective firearm safety screening and counseling. Patients and families are, for the most part, accepting of such screening and counseling. However, the current literature is, by and large, not high quality. Rigorous, large-scale, adequately funded studies are needed.