Domestic Violence in a University Emergency Department*

Ernst, Amy A.; Weiss, Steven J.; Nick, Todd G.; CASALLETTO, JENNIFER; Garza, Austin

doi:10.1097/00007611-200002000-00004

Cited by 11 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The published literature has examined the efficacy of detecting the incidence of DV by the use of written surveys, computer-based surveys, and by screening conducted by health care professionals, including physicians and nurses. Comparing our results to published prevalence data (11.3-54.2% with written or computerized surveys and 10.9 -36.9% with interviews performed by various ED personnel), our results were found to fall within the same range as found in the published reports regardless of the method of detection (2,(5)(6)(7)(8)(9)(10)(11)(12)(13)(14)(15).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Detection of Domestic Violence by a Domestic Violence Advocate in the ED

Hugl-Wajek

Cairo

Shah

et al. 2012

The Journal of Emergency Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

“…Although there is a good deal of existing literature on the prevalence and incidence of domestic violence, most of the previous studies have utilized a written survey or interviews by ED staff (registered nurse, physician assistant, or emergency physician) (2,(5)(6)(7)(8)(9)(10)(11)(12)(13)(14)(15).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Detection of Domestic Violence by a Domestic Violence Advocate in the ED

Hugl-Wajek

Cairo

Shah

et al. 2012

The Journal of Emergency Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Existe también evidencia de que ha sido empleado en muestras de varones con el objetivo de evaluar la frecuencia del abuso por parte de la pareja (Ernst, Houry, Nick, y Weiss, 1998;Ernst, Nick, Weiss, Houry, y Mills, 1997;Ernst, Weiss, Nick, Casalletto, y Garza, 2000); sin embargo, no se tiene conocimiento de que haya sido previamente adaptado y validado para su uso en muestras de varones. Por esta razón, el objetivo de este estudio es analizar algunas propiedades psicométricas del Index of Spouse Abuse en una muestra de varones españoles.…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

Propiedades psicométricas del index of spouse abuse en una muestra de varones españoles

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ResumenEl objetivo del presente estudio fue analizar algunas propiedades psicométricas de la versión española del Index of Spouse Abuse en una muestra de varones españoles, ya que no existen instrumentos validados en España en esta población. Participaron 598 varones con edades comprendidas entre 18 y 77 años (M = 40.20; DT = 13.71) seleccionados de la población general mediante muestreo incidental. Los resultados mostraron una estructura de 30 ítems agrupados en tres subescalas: Abuso no físico, Control de conductas y Abuso físico. Los valores de fiabilidad oscilaron entre .60 y .81. Mostró buena validez convergente con las puntuaciones de la Sexual Assertiveness Scale. Se encontró que las conductas de abuso más frecuentes son de abuso no físico y control de conductas, siendo el abuso físico menos frecuente. Se discuten los resultados obtenidos y sus implicaciones para la evaluación de la violencia de pareja en varones. Palabras clave: Index of Spouse Abuse, propiedades psicométricas, varones, violencia de pareja. AbstractThe aim of the presente study was to analyze some psychometric properties of the Index of Spouse Abuse in a Spanish male sample, because there are no adapted instruments in Spain for this population. Participants were 598 males with ages ranging from 18 to 77 years old (M = 40.20; SD = 13.71), and they were selected from general population through a convenience sampling procedure. Results showed a structure made up of 30 items clustered into three subscales: Nonphysical abuse, Behavior controlling, and Physical abuse. Reliability values ranged from .60 to .81. It showed good convergent validity with scores on the Sexual Assertiveness Scale. Further, it was found that nonphysical abuse and behavior controlling were the most frequent form of abuse, while physical abuse was less frequent. Results and their implications for the assessment of partner abuse are discussed.

show abstract

“…Recent literature reports the prevalence rate of male IPV is between 8.3% and 38%. [1][2][3][4]7 This is the first study to investigate male IPV in heterosexual and homosexual relationships. In reported police data files, more violent acts of abuse such as homicides, attempted homicides, and homicide-suicides occur in male-male relationships than in other relationships.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The prevalence rate of male IPV varies as reported by recent studies ranging from 8.3% to 38%. [1][2][3][4] This large variation is due to differences in study design. Male intimate partner violence is an area worthy of further investigation due to increased public awareness that IPV also affects men.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intimate Partner Violence among Men Presenting to a University Emergency Department

Johnson¹

2003

Academic Emergency Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: We sought to investigate the one-year point prevalence for male intimate partner violence (IPV) in men presenting to a university emergency department, to identify types of violence, to examine differences in male IPV rates based on patient demographics, and to identify any differences in prevalence based on types of partnership. Methods: This survey study was conducted from September 2001 until January 2002 at a tertiary, academic, Level I Trauma Center with an emergency department (ED) that has 40,000 visits per year. The anonymous written survey consisted of 16 questions previously validated in the Colorado Partner Violence Study, Index of Spouse Abuse and the Conflict Tactics Scale. This survey was administered to all consenting adult men who presented to the ED. Odds ratios (OR) with 95% CI were calculated when appropriate and a p-value of 0.05 was set for significance. Results: The oneyear point prevalence rate of male IPV was 24% in our study population (82/346). Among the men who experienced some form of abuse specified as either physical, emotional, or sexual, the prevalence was calculated to be 15.6% (54/346), 13.6% (47/346), and 2.6% (9/346), respectively. Education, income, age, and race did not demonstrate an association for any one variable to be associated with intimate partner abuse (p>0.05) with the exception of increased risk of IPV among unemployed men in the relationship (p<0.04, OR 0.592). IPV towards men was found to affect both heterosexual as well as homosexual relationships. Overall, 2% (8/346) of the men surveyed had received medical treatment as a result of IPV by their intimate partner within the past year. Three percent (11/344) of those men reporting abuse were abusers themselves. Conclusion: The point prevalence of IPV among our study population was 24%. In our study of 346 men, male IPV crossed all socioeconomic boundaries, racial differences, and educational levels regardless of the sex of the partner.

show abstract

Domestic Violence in a University Emergency Department*

Cited by 11 publications

References 0 publications

Detection of Domestic Violence by a Domestic Violence Advocate in the ED

Detection of Domestic Violence by a Domestic Violence Advocate in the ED

Propiedades psicométricas del index of spouse abuse en una muestra de varones españoles

Intimate Partner Violence among Men Presenting to a University Emergency Department

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About