Identifying the barriers faced by obstetricians and registrars in screening or enquiry of intimate partner violence in pregnancy: A systematic review of the primary evidence.

INTRODUCTION: Intimate partner violence (IPV) disproportionally affects women compared to men. The impact of IPV is amplified during pregnancy. Screening or enquiry in the antenatal outpatient setting regarding IPV has been fraught with barriers that prevent recognition and the ability to intervene. AIMS: The aim of this systematic review was to determine the barriers that face obstetricians/gynaecologists regarding enquiry of IPV in antenatal outpatient settings. The secondary objective was to determine facilitators. METHODS: Primary evidence was searched using Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Maternity and Infant Care, PubMed and Proquest from 1993 to May 2023. The included studies comprised empirical studies published in English language targeting a population of doctors providing antenatal outpatient care. The review was PROSPERO-registered (CRD42020188994). Independent screening and review was performed by two authors. The findings were analysed thematically. RESULTS: Nine studies addressing barriers and two studies addressing facilitators were included: three focus-group or semi-structured interviews, six surveys and two randomised controlled trials. Barriers for providers centred at the system level (time, training), provider level (personal beliefs, cultural bias, experience) and provider-perceived patient level (fear of offending, patient readiness to disclose). Increased experience and the use of validated tools were strong facilitators. CONCLUSION: Barriers to screening reflect multi-level obstruction to the identification of women exposed to IPV. Although the antenatal outpatient clinic setting addresses a particular population vulnerable to IPV, the barriers for obstetricians are not unique. The use of validated cueing tools provides an evidence-based method to facilitate enquiry of IPV among antenatal women, assisting in identification by clinicians. Together with education and human resources, such aids build capacity in women and obstetric providers.

Translation and cross-cultural adaptation of the Composite Abuse Scale into Brazilian Portuguese / Tradução e adaptação transcultural da Composite Abuse Scale para o português brasileiro

ABSTRACT OBJECTIVE To perform the translation and cross-cultural adaptation from English into Brazilian Portuguese of the Composite Abuse Scale, an instrument that identifies and quantifies intimate partner violence. METHODS This study is based on the strict implementation of its previously published protocol, which consists of ten steps: (a) conceptual analysis; (b) double-blind translation; (c) comparison and first reconciled version of the two translations; (d) back-translation; (e) review of the back-translation by the developer and second reconciled version; (f) expert committee review (n = 6); (g) comparison of expert reviews and third reconciled version; (h) cognitive interviews with women from the Casa da Mulher Brasileira in Curitiba (n = 15); (i) assessments of user perceptions and final reconciliation; and (j) submission of the final version of the questionnaire to the developer. RESULTS The implementation of the 10 steps of the protocol allowed the idiomatic, semantic, conceptual and experiential equivalences of the Composite Abuse Scale, incorporating suggestions and criticisms from the different participants of the process. Participants included the developer, professional translators, researchers specialized on the subject, women in situation of intimate partner violence, and professionals who provide care to them. Experts and cognitive interviews with women were instrumental in ensuring equivalence, and facilitating the understanding, including: (1) adaptation of the term "intimate relation" to "affective or conjugal relation"; (2) substitution of enclisis for proclisis cases in 20 items; (3) adoption of gender-neutral language, allowing its use in heterosexual, bisexual, and same-sex relations; (4) materialization of an instrument of scientific rigor and self-applicable, which may help women to visualize the situations of abuse in their relations. CONCLUSIONS The translation and cross-cultural adaptation process of the Composite Abuse Scale resulted in the Composite Abuse Scale Brazilian Portuguese Version, a 30-item self-applicable instrument, capable to identify and quantify intimate partner violence, its frequency, severity and typologies (physical, emotional, harassment and severe combined violence).

RESUMO OBJETIVO Realizar a tradução e adaptação transcultural do inglês para o português brasileiro da Composite Abuse Scale, instrumento que identifica e quantifica a violência por parceiro íntimo. MÉTODOS Este estudo baseia-se na execução rigorosa de seu protocolo, previamente publicado, e que consiste em dez etapas: (a) análise conceitual; (b) tradução duplo-cega; (c) comparação e primeira versão reconciliada das duas traduções; (d) retrotradução; (e) revisão da retrotradução feita pela desenvolvedora e segunda versão reconciliada; (f) revisão por comitê de especialistas (n = 6); (g) comparação das revisões por especialistas e terceira versão reconciliada; (h) entrevistas cognitivas com mulheres da Casa da Mulher Brasileira de Curitiba (n = 15); (i) avaliações das percepções das usuárias e reconciliação final; e (j) apresentação da versão final do questionário à desenvolvedora. RESULTADOS A execução das 10 etapas do protocolo permitiu as equivalências idiomática, semântica, conceitual e experiencial da Composite Abuse Scale, incorporando sugestões e críticas dos diferentes participantes do processo, que incluíram desde a desenvolvedora, tradutores profissionais, pesquisadores especializados no tema, mulheres em situação de violência por parceiro íntimo e profissionais que as atendem. Especialistas e entrevistas cognitivas com mulheres foram fundamentais para garantir equivalências e facilitar a compreensão, incluindo: (1) adaptação do termo "relacionamento íntimo" para "relacionamento afetivo ou conjugal"; (2) substituição de ênclises por próclises em 20 itens; (3) adoção de linguagem de gênero neutro, permitindo sua utilização em relacionamentos hetero, bi e homoafetivos; (4) materialização de um instrumento de rigor científico e autoaplicável, que pode auxiliar as mulheres a visibilizarem as situações de abuso em seus relacionamentos. CONCLUSÕES O processo de tradução e adaptação transcultural da Composite Abuse Scale resultou na Composite Abuse Scale Versão Português brasileiro, instrumento autoaplicável com 30 itens, capaz de identificar e quantificar a violência por parceiro íntimo, sua frequência, severidade e tipologias (violências física, emocional, assédio e grave combinada).

Consistency and Inconsistency of Young Women's Reporting of Intimate Partner Violence in a Population-Based Study.

We examined reporting of lifetime intimate partner violence (IPV) among 7,917 young women who completed two surveys, 12 months apart. At the first survey, 32% reported a history of IPV with a current or former partner. Of these, one third of women did not report IPV 12 months later (inconsistently reported IPV). Compared with women who consistently reported a history of IPV, women who inconsistently reported a history of IPV were less likely to report suicidal ideation, self-harm, illicit drug use, and smoking at the 12-month follow-up. A deeper understanding of what influences young women's reporting of IPV is needed.

Responding to Young People's Health Risks in Primary Care: A Cluster Randomised Trial of Training Clinicians in Screening and Motivational Interviewing.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of a complex intervention implementing best practice guidelines recommending clinicians screen and counsel young people across multiple psychosocial risk factors, on clinicians' detection of health risks and patients' risk taking behaviour, compared to a didactic seminar on young people's health. DESIGN: Pragmatic cluster randomised trial where volunteer general practices were stratified by postcode advantage or disadvantage score and billing type (private, free national health, community health centre), then randomised into either intervention or comparison arms using a computer generated random sequence. Three months post-intervention, patients were recruited from all practices post-consultation for a Computer Assisted Telephone Interview and followed up three and 12 months later. Researchers recruiting, consenting and interviewing patients and patients themselves were masked to allocation status; clinicians were not. SETTING: General practices in metropolitan and rural Victoria, Australia. PARTICIPANTS: General practices with at least one interested clinician (general practitioner or nurse) and their 14-24 year old patients. INTERVENTION: This complex intervention was designed using evidence based practice in learning and change in clinician behaviour and general practice systems, and included best practice approaches to motivating change in adolescent risk taking behaviours. The intervention involved training clinicians (nine hours) in health risk screening, use of a screening tool and motivational interviewing; training all practice staff (receptionists and clinicians) in engaging youth; provision of feedback to clinicians of patients' risk data; and two practice visits to support new screening and referral resources. Comparison clinicians received one didactic educational seminar (three hours) on engaging youth and health risk screening. OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcomes were patient report of (1) clinician detection of at least one of six health risk behaviours (tobacco, alcohol and illicit drug use, risks for sexually transmitted infection, STI, unplanned pregnancy, and road risks); and (2) change in one or more of the six health risk behaviours, at three months or at 12 months. Secondary outcomes were likelihood of future visits, trust in the clinician after exit interview, clinician detection of emotional distress and fear and abuse in relationships, and emotional distress at three and 12 months. Patient acceptability of the screening tool was also described for the intervention arm. Analyses were adjusted for practice location and billing type, patients' sex, age, and recruitment method, and past health risks, where appropriate. An intention to treat analysis approach was used, which included multilevel multiple imputation for missing outcome data. RESULTS: 42 practices were randomly allocated to intervention or comparison arms. Two intervention practices withdrew post allocation, prior to training, leaving 19 intervention (53 clinicians, 377 patients) and 21 comparison (79 clinicians, 524 patients) practices. 69% of patients in both intervention (260) and comparison (360) arms completed the 12 month follow-up. Intervention clinicians discussed more health risks per patient (59.7%) than comparison clinicians (52.7%) and thus were more likely to detect a higher proportion of young people with at least one of the six health risk behaviours (38.4% vs 26.7%, risk difference [RD] 11.6%, Confidence Interval [CI] 2.93% to 20.3%; adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.7, CI 1.1 to 2.5). Patients reported less illicit drug use (RD -6.0, CI -11 to -1.2; OR 0.52, CI 0.28 to 0.96), and less risk for STI (RD -5.4, CI -11 to 0.2; OR 0.66, CI 0.46 to 0.96) at three months in the intervention relative to the comparison arm, and for unplanned pregnancy at 12 months (RD -4.4; CI -8.7 to -0.1; OR 0.40, CI 0.20 to 0.80). No differences were detected between arms on other health risks. There were no differences on secondary outcomes, apart from a greater detection of abuse (OR 13.8, CI 1.71 to 111). There were no reports of harmful events and intervention arm youth had high acceptance of the screening tool. CONCLUSIONS: A complex intervention, compared to a simple educational seminar for practices, improved detection of health risk behaviours in young people. Impact on health outcomes was inconclusive. Technology enabling more efficient, systematic health-risk screening may allow providers to target counselling toward higher risk individuals. Further trials require more power to confirm health benefits. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN.com ISRCTN16059206.

Screening women for intimate partner violence in healthcare settings.

BACKGROUND: Intimate partner violence (IPV) damages individuals, their children, communities, and the wider economic and social fabric of society. Some governments and professional organisations recommend screening all women for IPV rather than asking only women with symptoms (case-finding). Here, we examine the evidence for whether screening benefits women and has no deleterious effects. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of screening for IPV conducted within healthcare settings on identification, referral, re-exposure to violence, and health outcomes for women, and to determine if screening causes any harm. SEARCH METHODS: On 17 February 2015, we searched CENTRAL, Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, six other databases, and two trial registers. We also searched the reference lists of included articles and the websites of relevant organisations. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials assessing the effectiveness of IPV screening where healthcare professionals either directly screened women face-to-face or were informed of the results of screening questionnaires, as compared with usual care (which could include screening that did not involve a healthcare professional). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently assessed the risk of bias in the trials and undertook data extraction. For binary outcomes, we calculated a standardised estimation of the odds ratio (OR). For continuous data, either a mean difference (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD) was calculated. All are presented with a 95% confidence interval (CI). MAIN RESULTS: We included 13 trials that recruited 14,959 women from diverse healthcare settings (antenatal clinics, women's health clinics, emergency departments, primary care) predominantly located in high-income countries and urban settings. The majority of studies minimised selection bias; performance bias was the greatest threat to validity. The overall quality of the body of evidence was low to moderate, mainly due to heterogeneity, risk of bias, and imprecision.We excluded five of 13 studies from the primary analysis as they either did not report identification data, or the way in which they did was not consistent with clinical identification by healthcare providers. In the remaining eight studies (n = 10,074), screening increased clinical identification of victims/survivors (OR 2.95, 95% CI 1.79 to 4.87, moderate quality evidence).Subgroup analyses suggested increases in identification in antenatal care (OR 4.53, 95% CI 1.82 to 11.27, two studies, n = 663, moderate quality evidence); maternal health services (OR 2.36, 95% CI 1.14 to 4.87, one study, n = 829, moderate quality evidence); and emergency departments (OR 2.72, 95% CI 1.03 to 7.19, three studies, n = 2608, moderate quality evidence); but not in hospital-based primary care (OR 1.53, 95% CI 0.79 to 2.94, one study, n = 293, moderate quality evidence).Only two studies (n = 1298) measured referrals to domestic violence support services following clinical identification. We detected no evidence of an effect on referrals (OR 2.24, 95% CI 0.64 to 7.86, low quality evidence).Four of 13 studies (n = 2765) investigated prevalence (excluded from main analysis as rates were not clinically recorded); detection of IPV did not differ between face-to-face screening and computer/written-based assessment (OR 1.12, 95% CI 0.53 to 2.36, moderate quality evidence).Only two studies measured women's experience of violence (three to 18 months after screening) and found no evidence that screening decreased IPV.Only one study reported on women's health with no differences observable at 18 months.Although no study reported adverse effects from screening interventions, harm outcomes were only measured immediately afterwards and only one study reported outcomes at three months.There was insufficient evidence on which to judge whether screening increases uptake of specialist services, and no studies included an economic evaluation. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The evidence shows that screening increases the identification of women experiencing IPV in healthcare settings. Overall, however, rates were low relative to best estimates of prevalence of IPV in women seeking healthcare. Pregnant women in antenatal settings may be more likely to disclose IPV when screened, however, rigorous research is needed to confirm this. There was no evidence of an effect for other outcomes (referral, re-exposure to violence, health measures, lack of harm arising from screening). Thus, while screening increases identification, there is insufficient evidence to justify screening in healthcare settings. Furthermore, there remains a need for studies comparing universal screening to case-finding (with or without advocacy or therapeutic interventions) for women's long-term wellbeing in order to inform IPV identification policies in healthcare settings.

Maternal and child health nurse screening and care for mothers experiencing domestic violence (MOVE): a cluster randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Mothers are at risk of domestic violence (DV) and its harmful consequences postpartum. There is no evidence to date for sustainability of DV screening in primary care settings. We aimed to test whether a theory-informed, maternal and child health (MCH) nurse-designed model increased and sustained DV screening, disclosure, safety planning and referrals compared with usual care. METHODS: Cluster randomised controlled trial of 12 month MCH DV screening and care intervention with 24 month follow-up. The study was set in community-based MCH nurse teams (91 centres, 163 nurses) in north-west Melbourne, Australia. Eight eligible teams were recruited. Team randomisation occurred at a public meeting using opaque envelopes. Teams were unable to be blinded. The intervention was informed by Normalisation Process Theory, the nurse-designed good practice model incorporated nurse mentors, strengthened relationships with DV services, nurse safety, a self-completion maternal health screening checklist at three or four month consultations and DV clinical guidelines. Usual care involved government mandated face-to-face DV screening at four weeks postpartum and follow-up as required. Primary outcomes were MCH team screening, disclosure, safety planning and referral rates from routine government data and a postal survey sent to 10,472 women with babies ≤ 12 months in study areas. Secondary outcomes included DV prevalence (Composite Abuse Scale, CAS) and harm measures (postal survey). RESULTS: No significant differences were found in routine screening at four months (IG 2,330/6,381 consultations (36.5 %) versus CG 1,792/7,638 consultations (23.5 %), RR = 1.56 CI 0.96-2.52) but data from maternal health checklists (n = 2,771) at three month IG consultations showed average screening rates of 63.1 %. Two years post-intervention, IG safety planning rates had increased from three (RR 2.95, CI 1.11-7.82) to four times those of CG (RR 4.22 CI 1.64-10.9). Referrals remained low in both intervention groups (IGs) and comparison groups (CGs) (<1 %). 2,621/10,472 mothers (25 %) returned surveys. No difference was found between arms in preference or comfort with being asked about DV or feelings about self. CONCLUSION: A nurse-designed screening and care model did not increase routine screening or referrals, but achieved significantly increased safety planning over 36 months among postpartum women. Self-completion DV screening was welcomed by nurses and women and contributed to sustainability. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12609000424202, 10/03/2009.

Screening women for intimate partner violence in healthcare settings: abridged Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effectiveness of screening for intimate partner violence conducted within healthcare settings to determine whether or not screening increases identification and referral to support agencies, improves women's wellbeing, decreases further violence, or causes harm. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis of trials assessing effectiveness of screening. Study assessment, data abstraction, and quality assessment were conducted independently by two of the authors. Standardised estimations of the risk ratios and 95% confidence intervals were calculated. DATA SOURCES: Nine databases searched up to July 2012 (CENTRAL, Medline, Medline(R), Embase, DARE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Sociological Abstracts, and ASSIA), and five trials registers searched up to 2010. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Randomised or quasi-randomised trials of screening programmes for intimate partner violence involving all women aged ≥ 16 attending a healthcare setting. We included only studies in which clinicians in the intervention arm personally conducted the screening, or were informed of the screening result at the time of the consultation, compared with usual care (or no screening). Studies of screening programmes that were followed by structured interventions such as advocacy or therapeutic intervention were excluded. RESULTS: 11 eligible trials (n=13,027) were identified. In six pooled studies (n=3564), screening increased the identification of intimate partner violence (risk ratio 2.33, 95% confidence interval 1.39 to 3.89), particularly in antenatal settings (4.26, 1.76 to 10.31). Based on three studies (n=1400), we detected no evidence that screening increases referrals to domestic violence support services (2.67, 0.99 to 7.20). Only two studies measured women's experience of violence after screening (three to 18 months after screening) and found no reduction in intimate partner violence. One study reported that screening does not cause harm. CONCLUSIONS: Though screening is likely to increase identification of intimate partner violence in healthcare settings, rates of identification from screening interventions were low relative to best estimates of prevalence of such violence. It is uncertain whether screening increases effective referral to supportive agencies. Screening does not seem to cause harm in the short term, but harm was measured in only one study. As the primary studies did not detect improved outcomes for women screened for intimate partner violence, there is insufficient evidence for screening in healthcare settings. Studies comparing screening versus case finding, or screening in combination with therapeutic intervention for women's long term wellbeing, are needed to inform the implementation of identification policies in healthcare settings.

Screening women for intimate partner violence in healthcare settings.

BACKGROUND: Intimate partner violence (IPV) damages individuals, their children, communities, and the wider economic and social fabric of society. Some governments and professional organisations recommend screening all women for intimate partner violence rather than asking only women with symptoms (case-finding); however, what is the evidence that screening interventions will increase identification, and referral to support agencies, or improve women's subsequent wellbeing and not cause harm? OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of screening for intimate partner violence conducted within healthcare settings for identification, referral to support agencies and health outcomes for women. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following databases in July 2012: CENTRAL (2012, Issue 6), MEDLINE (1948 to September Week June Week 3 2012), EMBASE (1980 to Week 28 2012), MEDLINE In-Process (3 July 2012), DARE (2012, Issue 2), CINAHL (1937 to current), PsycINFO (1806 to June Week 4 2012), Sociological Abstracts (1952 to current) and ASSIA (1987 to October 2010). In addition we searched the following trials registers: metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT) (to July 2012), and International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), ClinicalTrials.gov, Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry and the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number Register to August 2010. We also searched the reference lists of articles and websites of relevant organisations. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised or quasi-randomised trials assessing the effectiveness of IPV screening where healthcare professionals screened women face-to-face or were informed of results of screening questionnaires, compared with usual care ( which included screening for other purposes). DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed the risk of bias in the trials and undertook data extraction. For binary outcomes, we calculated a standardised estimation of the risk ratio (RR) and for continuous data, either a mean difference (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD). All are presented with a 95% confidence interval (CI). MAIN RESULTS: We included 11 trials that recruited 13,027 women overall. Six of 10 studies were assessed as being at high risk of bias.When data from six comparable studies were combined (n = 3564), screening increased identification of victims/survivors (RR 2.33; 95% CI 1.40 to 3.89), particularly in antenatal settings (RR 4.26; 95% CI 1.76 to 10.31).Only three studies measured referrals to support agencies (n = 1400). There is no evidence that screening increases such referrals, as although referral numbers increased in the screened group, actual numbers were very small and crossed the line of no effect (RR 2.67; 95% CI 0.99 to 7.20).Only two studies measured women's experience of violence after screening (one at three months, the other at six, 12 and 18 months after screening) and found no significant reduction of abuse.Only one study measured adverse effects and data from this study suggested that screening may not cause harm. This same study showed a trend towards mental health benefit, but the results did not reach statistical significance.There was insufficient evidence on which to judge whether screening increases take up of specialist services, and no studies included economic evaluation. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Screening is likely to increase identification rates but rates of referral to support agencies are low and as yet we know little about the proportions of false measurement (negatives or positives). Screening does not appear to cause harm, but only one study examined this outcome. As there is an absence of evidence of long-term benefit for women, there is insufficient evidence to justify universal screening in healthcare settings. Studies comparing screening versus case finding (with or without advocacy or therapeutic interventions) for women's long-term wellbeing would better inform future policies in healthcare settings.

A trajectory-based approach to understand the factors associated with persistent depressive symptoms in primary care.

BACKGROUND: Depression screening in primary care yields high numbers. Knowledge of how depressive symptoms change over time is limited, making decisions about type, intensity, frequency and length of treatment and follow-up difficult. This study is aimed to identify depressive symptom trajectories and associated socio-demographic, co-morbidity, health service use and treatment factors to inform clinical care. METHODS: 789 people scoring 16 or more on the CES-D recruited from 30 randomly selected Australian family practices. Depressive symptoms are measured using PHQ-9 at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months. RESULTS: Growth mixture modelling identified a five-class trajectory model as the best fitting (lowest Bayesian Information Criterion): three groups were static (mild (n=532), moderate (n=138) and severe (n=69)) and two were dynamic (decreasing severity (n=32) and increasing severity (n=18)). The mild symptom trajectory was the most common (n=532). The severe symptom trajectory group (n=69) differed significantly from the mild symptom trajectory group on most variables. The severe and moderate groups were characterised by high levels of disadvantage, abuse, morbidity and disability. Decreasing and increasing severity trajectory classes were similar on most variables. LIMITATIONS: Adult only cohort, self-report measures. CONCLUSIONS: Most symptom trajectories remained static, suggesting that depression, as it presents in primary care, is not always an episodic disorder. The findings indicate future directions for building prognostic models to distinguish those who are likely to have a mild course from those who are likely to follow more severe trajectories. Determining appropriate clinical responses based upon a likely depression course requires further research.

Identifying intimate partner violence when screening for health and lifestyle issues among women attending general practice.

Intimate partner violence is a common but under-recognised issue for women attending primary care. There is a lack of studies looking at women's comfort to discuss and openness to getting help for health issues, including fear of a partner, in primary care. Female patients (aged 16-50 years) attending 55 general practitioners (GPs) in Victoria, Australia were mailed a brief survey that screened for health and lifestyle issues, comfort to discuss these issues and intention to get help in primary care. Needing physical activity and smoking were the issues women were most comfortable to discuss; followed by difficulty controlling what and/or how much is eaten, feeling down, depressed, hopeless or worried, and use of drugs or alcohol. Women were least comfortable to discuss fear of a partner and least likely to seek help for it from the GP or primary care nurse. However, as with the other issues, acceptability of being asked in a survey was high. All health and lifestyle issues predicted fear of a partner. Primary care practitioners should be aware of this complex major public health issue especially when carrying out preventive health care.

Enhanced maternal and child health nurse care for women experiencing intimate partner/family violence: protocol for MOVE, a cluster randomised trial of screening and referral in primary health care.

BACKGROUND: Intimate partner violence (IPV) can result in significant harm to women and families and is especially prevalent when women are pregnant or recent mothers. Maternal and child health nurses (MCHN) in Victoria, Australia are community-based nurse/midwives who see over 95% of all mothers with newborns. MCHN are in an ideal position to identify and support women experiencing IPV, or refer them to specialist family violence services. Evidence for IPV screening in primary health care is inconclusive to date. The Victorian government recently required nurses to screen all mothers when babies are four weeks old, offering an opportunity to examine the effectiveness of MCHN IPV screening practices. This protocol describes the development and design of MOVE, a study to examine IPV screening effectiveness and the sustainability of screening practice. METHODS/DESIGN: MOVE is a cluster randomised trial of a good practice model of MCHN IPV screening involving eight maternal and child health nurse teams in Melbourne, Victoria. Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) was incorporated into the design, implementation and evaluation of the MOVE trial to enhance and evaluate sustainability. Using NPT, the development stage combined participatory action research with intervention nurse teams and a systematic review of nurse IPV studies to develop an intervention model incorporating consensus guidelines, clinical pathway and strategies for individual nurses, their teams and family violence services. Following twelve months' implementation, primary outcomes assessed include IPV inquiry, IPV disclosure by women and referral using data from MCHN routine data collection and a survey to all women giving birth in the previous eight months. IPV will be measured using the Composite Abuse Scale. Process and impact evaluation data (online surveys and key stakeholders interviews) will highlight NPT concepts to enhance sustainability of IPV identification and referral. Data will be collected again in two years. DISCUSSION: MOVE will be the first randomised trial to determine IPV screening effectiveness in a community based nurse setting and the first to examine sustainability of an IPV screening intervention. It will further inform the debate about the effectiveness of IPV screening and describe IPV prevalence in a community based post-partum and early infant population. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN12609000424202.

The prevention access and risk taking in young people (PARTY) project protocol: a cluster randomised controlled trial of health risk screening and motivational interviewing for young people presenting to general practice.

BACKGROUND: There are growing worldwide concerns about the ability of primary health care systems to manage the major burden of illness in young people. Over two thirds of premature adult deaths result from risks that manifest in adolescence, including injury, neuropsychiatric problems and consequences of risky behaviours. One policy response is to better reorientate primary health services towards prevention and early intervention. Currently, however, there is insufficient evidence to support this recommendation for young people. This paper describes the design and implementation of a trial testing an intervention to promote psychosocial risk screening of all young people attending general practice and to respond to identified risks using motivational interviewing. MAIN OUTCOMES: clinicians' detection of risk-taking and emotional distress, young people's intention to change and reduction of risk taking. SECONDARY OUTCOMES: pathways to care, trust in the clinician and likelihood of returning for future visits. The design of the economic and process evaluation are not detailed in this protocol. METHODS: PARTY is a cluster randomised trial recruiting 42 general practices in Victoria, Australia. Baseline measures include: youth friendly practice characteristics; practice staff's self-perceived competency in young people's care and clinicians' detection and response to risk taking behaviours and emotional distress in 14-24 year olds, attending the practice. Practices are then stratified by a social disadvantage index and billing methods and randomised. Intervention practices receive: nine hours of training and tools; feedback of their baseline data and two practice visits over six weeks. Comparison practices receive a three hour seminar in youth friendly practice only. Six weeks post-intervention, 30 consecutive young people are interviewed post-consultation from each practice and followed-up for self-reported risk taking behaviour and emotional distress three and 12 months post consultation. DISCUSSION: The PARTY trial is the first to examine the effectiveness and efficiency of a psychosocial risk screening and counselling intervention for young people attending primary care. It will provide important data on health risk profiles of young people attending general practice and on the effects of the intervention on engagement with primary care and health outcomes over 12 months. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN16059206.

Who is identified when screening for depression is undertaken in general practice? Baseline findings from the Diagnosis, Management and Outcomes of Depression in Primary Care (diamond) longitudinal study.

OBJECTIVES: To report the baseline characteristics of the Diagnosis, Management and Outcomes of Depression in Primary Care (diamond) study cohort and discuss the implications for depression care in general practice. DESIGN: A prospective longitudinal study beginning in January 2005. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: Adult patients with depressive symptoms identified via screening with the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D > or = 16) in 30 randomly selected Victorian general practices. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Depression status on the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ). RESULTS: 789 patients form the cohort (71% women). At baseline, 47% were married, 21% lived alone, 36% received a pension or benefit, 15% were unable to work, 23% reported hazardous drinking, 32% were smokers, 39% used antidepressants and 19% used sedatives. 27% satisfied criteria for current major depressive syndrome (MDS) on the PHQ, while 52% had "persistent" depressive symptoms, and 22% had "transient" depressive symptoms, lasting at most a few weeks. Of those satisfying criteria for MDS, 49% were also classified with an anxiety syndrome, 40% reported childhood sexual abuse, 57% reported childhood physical abuse, 42% had at some time been afraid of their partner, and 72% reported a chronic physical condition; 84% were receiving mental health care (either taking antidepressants or seeing a health practitioner specifically for mental health care) compared with 66% of those with persistent depressive symptoms and 57% with transient depressive symptoms. CONCLUSION: This method of screening for depressive symptoms in general practice identifies a group of patients with substantial multiple comorbidities -- psychiatric, physical and social problems coexist with depressive symptoms, raising challenges for the management of depression in general practice.

Tackling partner violence in families.

New guidelines extend opportunities for GPs to respond.

Women teaching women's health: issues in the establishment of a clinical teaching associate program for the well woman check.

The impact of screening programs for cervical cancer would be increased with the greater participation of currently underscreened women. Training for medical students and doctors in the fine technical and communication skills required in breast and gynaecological examinations would improve participation by increasing the confidence and skill of doctors in raising the issue of screening, thereby making the examination a more positive experience for women. Gynaecology Teaching Associate (GTA) programs, using specially trained standardized patients, have been used in over 90% of American and Canadian medical schools for more than ten years to provide such training. Australia has been slow to adopt this teaching method. A Clinical Teaching Associates in Gynaecology program (CTA) was first established in 1996 by the Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology at the University of Queensland, building on the Pap test program from Adelaide. Other medical schools subsequently introduced such programs and in 2000, the Department of General Practice, University of Melbourne, established a CTA program based on the Queensland program, with a grant from PapScreen Victoria. This paper describes the methods of recruitment and training of CTAs, use of CTAs in the medical course, preliminary evaluation, and ethical and other issues in the Melbourne and Queensland University programs.