Derivation and Validation of a Short Emergency Department Screening Tool for Perpetrators of Intimate Partner Violence: The PErpetrator RaPid Scale (PERPS)

Ernst, Amy A.; Weiss, Steven J.; Morgan-Edwards, Sarah; Rihani, Tuhama; Coffman, Brittany; Clark, Ross; Lucero, Melia; Jansen, Liz; Brokmeyer, Julie; Kaul, Eva; Hegyi, Michael; Ramone, Bernadette; Valdez, Melissa

doi:10.1016/j.jemermed.2011.01.032

Cited by 18 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 33 publications

(51 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Few clinical guidelines [1][2][3] have focused on identifying male perpetration or victimization, yet 1 in 5 men report using physical force toward an intimate partner, 4 and nearly 1 in 3 men report that an intimate partner has used physical force towards them. 5 Health care settings hold potential for IPV identification 6 and response among men. 7 Given that IPV-involved men seek routine health care services, 4 primary care physicians have the opportunity to ask male patients about IPV perpetration 3 or victimization.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prevalence of Intimate Partner Violence and Beliefs About Partner Violence Screening Among Young Men

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PURPOSE Few clinical guidelines focus on how physicians can identify intimate partner violence (IPV) perpetration or victimization among male patients, and little is known of men's experiences and beliefs regarding screening in health care settings. Our objective was to determine prevalence of men's experiences with IPV screening in health care settings and associations with men's beliefs regarding health care clinician identification of IPV. METHODS Using a cross-sectional online survey of a nationally representative sample of 916 men aged 18-35 years, we conducted survey-weighted descriptive analyses to determine IPV prevalence, screening experiences and beliefs, and multivariate logistic regression to examine associations of demographics, IPV perpetration, and IPV victimization with men's screening experiences and beliefs. RESULTSOf 916 men surveyed, 19% reported perpetration and 27% reported victimization in relationship with current or previous spouse/partner, 90% believed health care clinicians should ask about perpetration, 92% believed health care clinicians should ask about victimization, but only 11% had been asked about perpetration and 13% about victimization. Beliefs regarding IPV were associated with African American non-Hispanic race, IPV perpetration, and IPV victimization. Experiences being asked about IPV were associated with educational attainment and IPV perpetration. CONCLUSIONS Among young US men, 9 in 10 support IPV identification by health care clinicians, nearly 1 in 5 report using IPV, but only about 1 in 10 report health care clinicians asking about IPV. These represent missed opportunities for health care IPV identification. Beliefs and experiences regarding health care IPV identification vary by race, education, and men's IPV perpetration and victimization. These disparities can inform tailored health care identification approaches.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prevalence of Intimate Partner Violence and Beliefs About Partner Violence Screening Among Young Men

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Patients and providers desired a clinical tool for IPV use that patients could complete in the waiting room prior to their appointment. In fact, an IPV use self-report screening approach has shown success in prior research [ 18 ]. However, patients noted that a self-report screener would only be effective if the provider followed up on patient responses.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although effective treatment for Veterans who use IPV is becoming more readily available in VHA [17], a gap in knowledge regarding appropriate screening practices remains. Some screening instruments for the detection of IPV use [18,19] and general violence [20,21] have been developed for healthcare settings, but there is little research to guide their use in routine care. Only a handful of studies have been conducted exploring IPV use screening in healthcare settings in the U.S. [18,22,23] and internationally [24], and even less in the VHA [25], the largest integrated healthcare system in the United States (US).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patient and provider barriers, facilitators, and implementation preferences of intimate partner violence perpetration screening

Portnoy

Colon

Gross

et al. 2020

BMC Health Serv Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The substantial prevalence and consequences of intimate partner violence (IPV) underscore the need for effective healthcare response in the way of screening and follow up care. Despite growing evidence regarding perspectives on healthcare-based screening for IPV experiences (i.e., victimization), there is an extremely limited evidence-base to inform practice and policy for detecting IPV use (i.e., perpetration). This study identified barriers, facilitators, and implementation preferences among United States (US) Veterans Health Administration (VHA) patients and providers for IPV use screening. Methods: We conducted qualitative interviews with patients enrolled in VHA healthcare (N = 10) and focus groups with VHA providers across professional disciplines (N = 29). Data was analyzed using thematic and content analyses. Results: Qualitative analysis revealed convergence between patients' and providers' beliefs regarding key factors for IPV use screening, including the importance of a strong rapport, clear and comprehensive processes and procedures, universal implementation of screening, and a self-report screening tool that assesses for both IPV use and experiences concurrently. Conclusions: Findings provide foundational information regarding patient and provider barriers, facilitators, and preferences for IPV use screening that can inform clinical practice and next steps in this important but understudied aspect of healthcare.

show abstract

“…Developed by Ernst and colleagues (2012), the Perpetrator Rapid Scale (PERPS) is a 3-item screening tool designed to capture IPV in a busy hospital emergency room. Among the studies included in this review, it had the shortest reported administration time and least amount of questions.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Brief Intimate Partner Violence Perpetration Screening Tools: A Scoping Review

Davis

Padilla-Medina

2019

Trauma, Violence, & Abuse

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent research findings indicate that patients are willing to disclose their use of violence to health-care providers if asked. Health-care providers have a unique opportunity to screen their patients for intimate partner violence (IPV) perpetration; however, given the time constraints and limited personnel within medical offices and emergency-care facilities, instrument brevity is critically important. The development and evaluation of tools to screen for IPV perpetration in health-care settings, particularly brief instruments, is limited by the lack of adequate guidelines, clear institutional policies for screening, and reviews of the available literature. Given the need for validated measurement tools, we assessed the psychometric properties of measurement tools designed to quickly detect IPV perpetration by conducting a scoping review. Our search identified five measures meeting eligibility requirements. Inclusion criteria required that study information be published in a peer-reviewed journal, be published in English or Spanish languages, contain 10 or less items, report psychometric testing results, require no additional information, and be designed to detect IPV perpetration. We searched subject-specific databases and the bibliographies of relevant publications to identify studies. As part of appraising and synthesizing the evidence, we found most measures to have good reliability and validity. Most measures contained 2–5 items. Most studies were conducted in the United States and utilized an adequate sample size. There were considerable differences in how each of the measures determined a positive or negative screening. Gaps in the literature and areas for future research pertained to sample diversity, invariance testing, and practice guidelines for implementation.

show abstract

Derivation and Validation of a Short Emergency Department Screening Tool for Perpetrators of Intimate Partner Violence: The PErpetrator RaPid Scale (PERPS)

Cited by 18 publications

References 33 publications

Prevalence of Intimate Partner Violence and Beliefs About Partner Violence Screening Among Young Men

Prevalence of Intimate Partner Violence and Beliefs About Partner Violence Screening Among Young Men

Patient and provider barriers, facilitators, and implementation preferences of intimate partner violence perpetration screening

Brief Intimate Partner Violence Perpetration Screening Tools: A Scoping Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About