Abstract

CONTEXT
Although partner violence screening has been endorsed by many health organizations, there is insufficient evidence that it has beneficial health outcomes.
OBJECTIVE
To determine the effect of computerized screening for partner violence plus provision of a partner violence resource list vs provision of a partner violence list only on women's health in primary care settings, compared with a control group.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS
A 3-group blinded randomized controlled trial at 10 primary health care centers in Cook County, Illinois. Participants were enrolled from May 2009-April 2010 and reinterviewed 1 year (range, 48-56 weeks) later. Participants were English- or Spanish-speaking women meeting specific inclusion criteria and seeking clinical services at study sites. Of 3537 women approached, 2727 were eligible, 2708 were randomized (99%), and 2364 (87%) were recontacted 1 year later. Mean age of participants was 39 years. Participants were predominantly non-Latina African American (55%) or Latina (37%), had a high school education or less (57%), and were uninsured (57%).
INTERVENTION
Randomization into 3 intervention groups: (1) partner violence screen (using the Partner Violence Screen instrument) plus a list of local partner violence resources if screening was positive (n = 909); (2) partner violence resource list only without screen (n = 893); and (3) no-screen, no-partner violence list control group (n=898).
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES
Quality of life (QOL, physical and mental health components) was the primary outcome, measured on the 12-item Short Form (scale range 0-100, mean of 50 for US population).
RESULTS
At 1-year follow-up, there were no significant differences in the QOL physical health component between the screen plus partner violence resource list group (n = 801; mean score, 46.8; 95% CI, 46.1-47.4), the partner violence resource list only group (n = 772; mean score, 46.4; 95% CI, 45.8-47.1), and the control group (n = 791; mean score, 47.2; 95% CI, 46.5-47.8), or in the mental health component (screen plus partner violence resource list group [mean score, 48.3; 95% CI, 47.5-49.1], the partner violence resource list only group [mean score, 48.0; 95% CI, 47.2-48.9], and the control group [mean score, 47.8; 95% CI, 47.0-48.6]). There were also no differences between groups in days unable to work or complete housework; number of hospitalizations, emergency department, or ambulatory care visits; proportion who contacted a partner violence agency; or recurrence of partner violence.
CONCLUSIONS
Among women receiving care in primary care clinics, providing a partner violence resource list with or without screening did not result in improved health.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00526994.

Links

Publisher Full Text

Authors

Klevens J, Kee R, Trick W, Garcia D, Angulo FR, Jones R, Sadowski LS

Institution

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Division of Violence Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA. levens@cdc.gov

Source

JAMA : the journal of the American Medical Association 308:7 2012 Aug 15 pg 681-9

MeSH

Activities of Daily Living
Adolescent
Adult
Domestic Violence
Employment
Female
Health Services
Health Status
Humans
Male
Mass Screening
Middle Aged
Primary Health Care
Quality of Life
Single-Blind Method
Treatment Outcome
Young Adult

Pub Type(s)

Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S.

Language

eng

PubMed ID

22893165