Accuracy of 3 Brief Screening Questions for Detecting Partner Violence in the Emergency Department
Accuracy of 3 Brief Screening Questions for Detecting Partner Violence in the Emergency Department
复制标题
急诊科检测伴侣暴力的 3 个简短筛查问题的准确性
DOI：
10.1001/jama.1997.03540410035027
复制
发表时间：
1997
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
J. Abbott
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
K. Feldhaus;J. Koziol;H. L. Amsbury;I. M. Norton;S. Lowenstein;J. Abbott
客观的。 —设计一个简短的筛查工具来检测伴侣暴力，并根据现有工具部分验证该筛查。设计。 ——前瞻性调查。环境。 — 两个城市医院急诊科。参与者。 — 在 48 个随机选择的 4 小时时间段内就诊的 491 名女性中，有 322 名（符合条件的患者的 76%）参与了研究。受访者的平均年龄为 36 岁； 19% 为黑人，45% 为白人，30% 为西班牙裔，6% 为其他种族或族裔群体； 54% 已投保。干预措施。 —我们开发了伴侣暴力筛查 (PVS)，其中包含 3 个关于过去的身体暴力和感知的人身安全的问题。我们实施了 PVS 和 2 项伴侣暴力标准化衡量标准：配偶虐待指数 (ISA) 和冲突策略量表 (CTS)。主要成果措施。 —将 PVS 的敏感性、特异性和预测值与 ISA 和 CTS 作为标准进行比较。结果。 — 使用 PVS 的伴侣暴力发生率为 29.5%（95% 置信区间 [CI]，24.6%-34.8%）。 ISA 和 CTS 的患病率分别为 24.3%（95% CI，19.2%-30.1%）和 27.4%（95% CI，21.7%-33.6%）。与ISA相比，PVS检测伴侣虐待的敏感性为64.5%；特异性为80.3%。与CTS相比，PVS的敏感性为71.4%；特异性为84.4%。阳性预测值范围为51.3%至63.4%，阴性预测值范围为87.6%至88.7%。总体而言，13.7% 的就诊是由于伴侣严重暴力事件造成的。结论。 —三个简短的定向问题可以发现大量有伴侣暴力史的女性。
Objective. —To devise a brief screening instrument to detect partner violence and to partially validate this screen against established instruments. Design. —Prospective survey. Setting. —Two urban, hospital-based emergency departments. Participants. —Of 491 women presenting during 48 randomly selected 4-hour time blocks, 322 (76% of eligible patients) participated. Respondents had a median age of 36 years; 19% were black, 45% white, and 30% Hispanic, while 6% were of other racial or ethnic groups; 54% were insured. Interventions. —We developed a partner violence screen (PVS), consisting of 3 questions about past physical violence and perceived personal safety. We administered the PVS and 2 standardized measures of partner violence, the Index of Spouse Abuse (ISA) and the Conflict Tactics Scale (CTS). Main Outcome Measures. —Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values of the PVS were compared with the ISA and the CTS as criterion standards. Results. —The prevalence rate of partner violence using the PVS was 29.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 24.6%-34.8%). For the ISA and CTS, the prevalence rates were 24.3% (95% CI, 19.2%-30.1%) and 27.4% (95% CI, 21.7%-33.6%), respectively. Compared with the ISA, the sensitivity of the PVS in detecting partner abuse was 64.5%; the specificity was 80.3%. When compared with the CTS, sensitivity of the PVS was 71.4%; the specificity was 84.4%. Positive predictive values ranged from 51.3% to 63.4%, and negative predictive values ranged from 87.6% to 88.7%. Overall, 13.7% of visits were the result of acute episodes of partner violence. Conclusion. —Three brief directed questions can detect a large number of women who have a history of partner violence.