Effectiveness of anonymised information sharing and use in health service, police, and local government partnership for preventing violence related injury: experimental study and time series analysis

Florence, Curtis S.; Shepherd, Jonathan Paul; Brennan, Iain; Simon, Thomas R.

doi:10.1136/bmj.d3313

Cited by 142 publications

(130 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

113

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…15 In USA, 13 % of shootings resulting in ED care in Atlanta were not included in citywide police records. 16 Researchers found that a number of medically documented nonfatal shootings could not be matched with a corresponding police report.…”

Section: Death In Custody Reporting Actmentioning

confidence: 99%

Who Shot Ya? How Emergency Departments Can Collect Reliable Police Shooting Data

Richardson¹,

Vil

Cooper

2015

J Urban Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper examines an alternative solution for collecting reliable police shooting data. One alternative is the collection of police shooting data from hospital trauma units, specifically hospital-based violence intervention programs. These programs are situated in Level I trauma units in many major cities in USA. While the intent of these programs is to reduce the risk factors associated with trauma recidivism among victims of violent injury, they also collect reliable data on the number of individuals treated for gunshot wounds. While most trauma units do a great job collecting data on mode of injury, many do not collect data on the circumstances surrounding the injury, particularly police-involved shootings. Research protocol on firearm-related injury conducted in emergency departments typically does not allow researchers to interview victims of violent injury who are under arrest. Most victims of nonfatal police-involved shootings are under arrest at the time they are treated by the ED for their injury. Research protocol on victims of violent injury often excludes individuals under arrest; they fall under the exclusion criteria when recruiting potential participants for research on violence. Researchers working in hospital emergency departments are prohibited from recruited individuals under arrests. The trauma staff, particularly ED physicians and nurses, are in a strategic position to collect this kind of data. Thus, this paper examines how trauma units can serve as an alternative in the reliable collection of police shooting data.

show abstract

Section: Death In Custody Reporting Actmentioning

confidence: 99%

Who Shot Ya? How Emergency Departments Can Collect Reliable Police Shooting Data

Richardson¹,

Vil

Cooper

2015

J Urban Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…1 We also found that the police rarely knew about violence in licensed premises and that the use of the unique information available from trauma patients about where, when and how they were injured could cut violence and its huge costs substantially. 2,3 It also became clear from our trials of motivational interviewing that brief advice about alcohol was effective when given to patients having sutures removed in maxillofacial clinics and in other settings. 4 These and other discoveries were the basis for advocacy for prevention.…”

Section: An Inspiring Specialtymentioning

confidence: 97%

An inspiring specialty

Shepherd

2016

Br Dent J

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…This interpretation is consistent with increased police ascertainment of violence as a result of other violence prevention interventions: greater violence visibility is also the result of public-space CCTV and data from A&E departments. 90,91 Overall, it appears that the intervention was not fully implemented, with very few follow-up enforcement visits. Despite audit data indicating that nearly 40% of intervention premises should have received some form of follow-up visit, fewer than 10% received one.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

All-Wales Licensed Premises Intervention (AWLPI): a randomised controlled trial of an intervention to reduce alcohol-related violence

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundViolence in and around premises licensed for the on-site sale and consumption of alcohol continues to burden the NHS with assault-related injuries.Trial designA randomised controlled trial with licensed premises as the unit of allocation, with additional process and cost-effectiveness evaluations.MethodsPremises were eligible (n = 837) if they were licensed for on-site sale and consumption of alcohol, were within 1 of the 22 local authorities (LAs) in Wales and had previously experienced violence. Data were analysed using Andersen–Gill recurrent event models in an intention-to-treat analysis. An embedded process evaluation examined intervention implementation, reach, fidelity, dose and receipt. An economic evaluation compared costs of the intervention with benefits.InterventionPremises were randomised to receive a violence-reduction intervention, Safety Management in Licensed Environments (SMILE), which was delivered by an environmental health practitioner (EHP; the agent). SMILE consisted of an initial risk audit to identify known risks of violence, a follow-up audit scheduled to enforce change for premises in which serious risks had been identified, structured advice from EHPs on how risks could be addressed in premises and online materials that provided educational videos and related material.ObjectiveTo develop intervention materials that are acceptable and consistent with EHPs’ statutory remit; to determine the effectiveness of the SMILE intervention in reducing violence; to determine reach, fidelity, dose and receipt of the intervention; and to consider intervention cost-effectiveness.OutcomeDifference in police-recorded violence between intervention and control premises over a 455-day follow-up period.RandomisationA minimum sample size of 274 licensed premises per arm was required, rounded up to 300 and randomly selected from the eligible population. Licensed premises were randomly assigned by computer to intervention and control arms in a 1 : 1 ratio. Optimal allocation was used, stratified by LA. Premises opening hours, volume of previous violence and LA EHP capacity were used to balance the randomisation. Premises were dropped from the study if they were closed at the time of audit.ResultsSMILE was delivered with high levels of reach and fidelity but similar levels of dose to all premises, regardless of risk level. Intervention premises (n = 208) showed an increase in police-recorded violence compared with control premises (n = 245), although results are underpowered. An initial risk audit was less effective than normal practice (hazard ratio = 1.34, 95% confidence interval 1.20 to 1.51) and not cost-effective. Almost all eligible intervention premises (98.6%) received the initial risk audit; nearly 40% of intervention practices should have received follow-up visits but fewer than 10% received one. The intervention was acceptable to EHPs and to some premises staff, but less so for smaller independent premises.ConclusionsSMILE was associated with an increase in police-recorded violence in intervention premises, compared with control premises. A lack of follow-up enforcement visits suggests implementation failure for what was seen as a key mechanism of action. There are also concerns as to the robustness of police data for targeting and assessing outcome effectiveness, while intervention premises may have received greater attention from statutory agencies and, therefore, the identification of more violence than control premises. Although SMILE had high reach and was feasible and acceptable to EHPs, it was found to be ineffective and associated with increased levels of violence, compared with normal practice and it requires additional work to promote the implementation of follow-up enforcement visits. Future work will aim to better understand the role of intervention dose on outcomes and seek more objective measures of violence for use in similar trials.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN78924818.FundingThis project was funded by the NIHR Public Health Research programme and will be published in full inPublic Health Research; Vol. 3, No. 10. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

show abstract

Effectiveness of anonymised information sharing and use in health service, police, and local government partnership for preventing violence related injury: experimental study and time series analysis

Cited by 142 publications

References 28 publications

Who Shot Ya? How Emergency Departments Can Collect Reliable Police Shooting Data

Who Shot Ya? How Emergency Departments Can Collect Reliable Police Shooting Data

An inspiring specialty

All-Wales Licensed Premises Intervention (AWLPI): a randomised controlled trial of an intervention to reduce alcohol-related violence

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About