Improving access to general practice for and with people with severe and multiple disadvantage: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: People with severe and multiple disadvantage (SMD) who experience combinations of homelessness, substance misuse, violence, abuse, and poor mental health have high health needs and poor access to primary care. AIM: To improve access to general practice for people with SMD by facilitating collaborative service improvement meetings between healthcare staff, people with lived experience of SMD, and those who support them; participants were then interviewed about this work. DESIGN AND SETTING: The Bridging Gaps group is a collaboration between healthcare staff, researchers, women with lived experience of SMD, and a charity that supports them in a UK city. A project was co-produced by the Bridging Gaps group to improve access to general practice for people with SMD, which was further developed with three inner-city general practices. METHOD: Nine service improvement meetings were facilitated at three general practices, and six of these were formally observed. Nine practice staff and four women with lived experience of SMD were interviewed. Three women with lived experience of SMD and one staff member who supports them participated in a focus group. Data were analysed inductively and deductively using thematic analysis. RESULTS: By providing time and funding opportunities to motivated general practice staff and involving participants with lived experience of SMD, service changes were made in an effort to improve access for people with SMD. These included prioritising patients on an inclusion patient list with more flexible access, providing continuity for patients via a care coordinator and micro-team of clinicians, and developing an information-sharing document. The process and outcomes improved connections within and between general practices, support organisations, and people with SMD. CONCLUSION: The co-designed strategies described in this study could be adapted locally and evaluated in other areas. Investing in this focused way of working may improve accessibility to health care, health equity, and staff wellbeing.

Harmonising outcome measurement for child focused domestic abuse interventions. Reflections on the development and implementation of a core outcome set.

There is appetite in the UK to better measure the impact of domestic violence and abuse (DVA) interventions on children. The spread of outcomes-based commissioning means outcome measurement is no longer just the territory of academic researchers but is now firmly within the purview of practitioners and policy makers. However, outcomes measured in trials only partially represent the views of those delivering and using services with respect to how success should be defined and captured. Even within trials there is huge inconsistency in the definition and measurement of important endpoints. This yields a body of evidence that is difficult to make sense of, defeating the ends for which it was produced - to improve the response to children and families who have experienced abuse. Development of Core Outcome Sets (COS) is seen as a solution to this problem, by establishing consensus across key stakeholder groups regarding a minimum standard for outcome measurement in trials, and increasingly in service delivery contexts. To date COS development has addressed outcomes relating to health conditions or interventions, with limited application to public health challenges. We reflect on our efforts to develop a COS to evaluate psychosocial interventions for children and families experiencing DVA. We highlight the value of COS development as a mechanism for improving evidence quality and the response to families experiencing abuse. Finally, we make recommendations to researchers and COS guideline developers to support this broader application of COS methodology.

Primary care system-level training and support programme for the secondary prevention of domestic violence and abuse: a cost-effectiveness feasibility model.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to evaluate the prospective cost-effectiveness of the Identification and Referral to Improve Safety plus (IRIS+) intervention compared with usual care using feasibility data derived from seven UK general practice sites. METHOD: A cost-utility analysis was conducted to assess the potential cost-effectiveness of IRIS+, an enhanced model of the UK's usual care. IRIS+ assisted primary care staff in identifying, documenting and referring not only women, but also men and children who may have experienced domestic violence/abuse as victims, perpetrators or both. A perpetrator group programme was not part of the intervention per se but was linked to the IRIS+ intervention via a referral pathway and signposting. A Markov model was constructed from a societal perspective to estimate mean incremental costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) of IRIS+ compared with to usual care over a 10-year time horizon. RESULTS: The IRIS+ intervention saved £92 per patient and produced QALY gains of 0.003. The incremental net monetary benefit was positive (£145) and the IRIS+ intervention was cost-effective in 55% of simulations at a cost-effectiveness threshold of £20 000 per QALY. CONCLUSION: The IRIS+ intervention could be cost-effective or even cost saving from a societal perspective in the UK, though there are large uncertainties, reflected in the confidence intervals and simulation results.

Feasibility of a reconfigured domestic violence and abuse training and support intervention responding to affected women, men, children and young people through primary care.

BACKGROUND: Identification in UK general practice of women affected by domestic violence and abuse (DVA) is increasing, but men and children/young people (CYP) are rarely identified and referred for specialist support. To address this gap, we collaborated with IRISi (UK social enterprise) to strengthen elements of the IRIS + intervention which included the identification of men, direct engagement with CYP, and improved guidance on responding to information received from other agencies. IRIS + was an adaptation of the national IRIS (Identification and Referral to Improve Safety) model focused on the needs of women victim-survivors of DVA. Without diminishing the responses to women, IRIS + also responded to the needs of men experiencing or perpetrating DVA, and CYP living with DVA and/or experiencing it in their own relationships. Our study tested the feasibility of the adapted IRIS + intervention in England and Wales between 2019-21. METHODS: We used mixed method analysis to triangulate data from various sources (pre/post intervention questionnaires with primary care clinicians; data extracted from medical records and DVA agencies; semi-structured interviews with clinicians, service providers and referred adults and children) to assess the feasibility and acceptability of the IRIS + intervention. RESULTS: The rate of referral for women doubled (21.6/year/practice) from the rate (9.29/year/practice) in the original IRIS trial. The intervention also enabled identification and direct referral of CYP (15% of total referrals) and men (mostly survivors, 10% of total referrals). Despite an increase in self-reported clinician preparedness to respond to all patient groups, the intervention generated a low number of men perpetrator referrals (2% of all referrals). GPs were the principal patient referrers. Over two-thirds of referred women and CYP and almost half of all referred men were directly supported by the service. Many CYP also received IRIS + support indirectly, via the referred parents. Men and CYP supported by IRIS + reported improved physical and mental health, wellbeing, and confidence. CONCLUSIONS: Although the study showed acceptability and feasibility, there remains uncertainty about the effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and scalability of IRIS + . Building on the success of this feasibility study, the next step should be trialling the effectiveness of IRIS + implementation to inform service implementation decisions.

How effective are UK-based support interventions and services targeted at adults who have experienced domestic and sexual violence and abuse at improving their safety and wellbeing? A systematic review protocol.

BACKGROUND: Domestic and sexual violence and abuse (DSVA) is prevalent in the UK, with wide-ranging impacts both on individuals and society. However, to date, there has been no systematic synthesis of the evidence for the effectiveness of UK-based support interventions and services for victim-survivors of DSVA. This review will aim to systematically collate, synthesise and quality assess the evidence regarding the effectiveness of UK support interventions and services targeted at those who have experienced DSVA. The review will use findings of a preliminary scoping review, as well as input from stakeholders representing domestic and sexual violence third sector organisations to identify and prioritise the most relevant outcomes to focus on. METHODS: We will undertake a systematic search for peer-reviewed literature in MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Social Policy and Practice, Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts (ASSIA), International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS), Sociological abstracts and SSCI. Grey literature will be identified by searching grey literature databases, circulating a call for evidence to local and national DSVA charities and organisations, and targeted website searching. Two reviewers will independently perform study selection and quality appraisal, with data extraction undertaken by one reviewer and checked for accuracy by a second reviewer. Narrative synthesis will be conducted, with meta-analysis if possible. DISCUSSION: Existing individual studies and evaluations have reported positive impacts of support interventions and services for those who have experienced DSVA. Thus, it is expected that this review and synthesis will provide robust and conclusive evidence of these effects. It will also allow comparisons to be made between different types of support interventions and services, to inform policy makers and funders regarding the most effective ways of reducing domestic and sexual violence and abuse and its impacts.

Protocol for a randomised controlled trial of a healthy relationship tool for men who use intimate partner violence (BETTER MAN).

BACKGROUND: Intimate partner violence (IPV) is common globally, but there is a lack of research on how to intervene early with men who might be using IPV. Building on evidence supporting the benefits of online interventions for women victim/survivors, this study aims to test whether a healthy relationship website (BETTER MAN) is effective at improving men's help seeking, their recognition of behaviours as IPV and their readiness to change their behaviours. METHODS/DESIGN: In this two-group, pragmatic randomised controlled trial, men aged 18-50 years residing in Australia who have been in an adult intimate relationship (female, male or non-binary partner) in the past 12 months are eligible. Men who report being worried about their behaviour or have had others express concerns about their behaviour towards a partner in the past 12 months will be randomised with a 1:1 allocation ratio to receive the BETTER MAN website or a comparator website (basic healthy relationships information). The BETTER MAN intervention includes self-directed, interactive reflection activities spread across three modules: Better Relationships, Better Values and Better Communication, with a final "action plan" of strategies and resources. Using an intention to treat approach, the primary analysis will estimate between-group difference in the proportion of men who report undertaking help-seeking behaviours for relationship issues in the last 6 months, at 6 months post-baseline. Analysis of secondary outcomes will estimate between-group differences in: (i) mean score of awareness of behaviours in relationships as abusive immediately post-use of website; (ii) mean score on readiness to change immediately post-use of website and 3 months after baseline; and (iii) cost-effectiveness. DISCUSSION: This trial will evaluate the effectiveness of an online healthy relationship tool for men who may use IPV. BETTER MAN could be incorporated into practice in community and health settings, providing an evidence-informed website to assist men to seek help to promote healthy relationships and reduce use of IPV. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN12622000786796 with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: 2 June 2022. Version: 1 (28 September 2023).

Child maltreatment and parental domestic violence and abuse, co-occurrence and the effect on lifetime outcomes in the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC).

Exposure to child maltreatment (CM), and parental domestic violence and abuse (DVA), impose considerable adverse life outcomes in both the short and long term, yet, the extent and effects of their co-occurrence on outcomes have not been comprehensively quantified. This study describes the analysis of data from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children, quantifying the prevalence of CM, parental DVA, co-occurrence rates, and the impact of different combinations of childhood exposures on life outcomes (health, economic, and likelihood of perpetrating intimate partner violence as a young person). Childhood exposure prevalences were estimated at 41.7% for any form of CM, 19.3% for parental DVA, and 49.0% for exposure to at least one form of CM and/or parental DVA. Co-occurring parental DVA was reported in 21%-42% of CM-exposed households. Sexual abuse was reported in 2% of parental DVA-exposed households, whilst co-occurrence of other forms of CM ranged between 19% and 41%. Co-occurring CM and parental DVA exposures were associated with increased risks of drug use, anxiety, depression, smoking, unemployment, social welfare use, and perpetration of intimate partner violence as a young person - highlighting the intergenerational effects of exposure. Increased risks across a wider range of adverse outcomes were associated with child-reported awareness of parental DVA, compared to parent-reported DVA exposure. The high cumulative prevalence of childhood exposure to CM and/or parental DVA, and the scale of the resulting adverse impacts emphasise the need for policies and family interventions sensitive to the possibility of co-occurring forms of abuse.

Improving access to general practice for people with severe and multiple disadvantage: a realist review protocol (The Connection Study).

Introduction: Despite having high unmet health need, people with severe and multiple disadvantage (SMD, including combinations of homelessness, substance misuse, poor mental health and domestic violence and abuse) have poor access to general practice. This realist review will examine the existing evidence on interventions or aspects of routine care in general practice that are likely to increase or decrease access to general practice for people with SMD. Methods and analysis: he aim of this review is to identify how these interventions or aspects of routine care increase or decrease access to general practice for people with SMD, in which contexts and for which patients. This review will involve a process comprising five sequential phases: (1) identifying established theories, (2) conducting an extensive search for proof, (3) selecting appropriate articles, (4) gathering and organising relevant data, and (5) utilising a realist analytical approach to synthesise evidence and make conclusions. Local implementation documents, in addition to published research studies, will be incorporated to enrich the analysis. We will collaborate with a stakeholder group consisting of people with lived experience of SMD and those who support them to advise us throughout. Ethics and dissemination: Ethical approval is not required. Our findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications, conference presentations and lay summaries and will be used to develop a complex intervention for improving access to general practice for and with people with severe and multiple disadvantage. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42023390495.

Psychosocial interventions for survivors of rape and sexual assault experienced during adulthood.

BACKGROUND: Exposure to rape, sexual assault and sexual abuse has lifelong impacts for mental health and well-being. Prolonged Exposure (PE), Cognitive Processing Therapy (CPT) and Eye Movement Desensitisation and Reprocessing (EMDR) are among the most common interventions offered to survivors to alleviate post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and other psychological impacts. Beyond such trauma-focused cognitive and behavioural approaches, there is a range of low-intensity interventions along with new and emerging non-exposure based approaches (trauma-sensitive yoga, Reconsolidation of Traumatic Memories and Lifespan Integration). This review presents a timely assessment of international evidence on any type of psychosocial intervention offered to individuals who experienced rape, sexual assault or sexual abuse as adults. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of psychosocial interventions on mental health and well-being for survivors of rape, sexual assault or sexual abuse experienced during adulthood. SEARCH METHODS: In January 2022, we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, 12 other databases and three trials registers. We also checked reference lists of included studies, contacted authors and experts, and ran forward citation searches. SELECTION CRITERIA: Any study that allocated individuals or clusters of individuals by a random or quasi-random method to a psychosocial intervention that promoted recovery and healing following exposure to rape, sexual assault or sexual abuse in those aged 18 years and above compared with no or minimal intervention, usual care, wait-list, pharmacological only or active comparison(s). We classified psychosocial interventions according to Cochrane Common Mental Disorders Group's psychological therapies list. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. MAIN RESULTS: We included 36 studies (1991 to 2021) with 3992 participants randomly assigned to 60 experimental groups (3014; 76%) and 23 inactive comparator conditions (978, 24%). The experimental groups consisted of: 32 Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT); 10 behavioural interventions; three integrative therapies; three humanist; five other psychologically oriented interventions; and seven other psychosocial interventions. Delivery involved 1 to 20 (median 11) sessions of traditional face-to-face (41) or other individual formats (four); groups (nine); or involved computer-only interaction (six). Most studies were conducted in the USA (n = 26); two were from South Africa; two from the Democratic Republic of the Congo; with single studies from Australia, Canada, the Netherlands, Spain, Sweden and the UK. Five studies did not disclose a funding source, and all disclosed sources were public funding. Participants were invited from a range of settings: from the community, through the media, from universities and in places where people might seek help for their mental health (e.g. war veterans), in the aftermath of sexual trauma (sexual assault centres and emergency departments) or for problems that accompany the experience of sexual violence (e.g. sexual health/primary care clinics). Participants randomised were 99% women (3965 participants) with just 27 men. Half were Black, African or African-American (1889 participants); 40% White/Caucasian (1530 participants); and 10% represented a range of other ethnic backgrounds (396 participants). The weighted mean age was 35.9 years (standard deviation (SD) 9.6). Eighty-two per cent had experienced rape or sexual assault in adulthood (3260/3992). Twenty-two studies (61%) required fulfilling a measured PTSD diagnostic threshold for inclusion; however, 94% of participants (2239/2370) were reported as having clinically relevant PTSD symptoms at entry. The comparison of psychosocial interventions with inactive controls detected that there may be a beneficial effect at post-treatment favouring psychosocial interventions in reducing PTSD (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.22 to -0.44; 16 studies, 1130 participants; low-certainty evidence; large effect size based on Cohen's D); and depression (SMD -0.82, 95% CI -1.17 to -0.48; 12 studies, 901 participants; low-certainty evidence; large effect size). Psychosocial interventions, however, may not increase the risk of dropout from treatment compared to controls, with a risk ratio of 0.85 (95% CI 0.51 to 1.44; 5 studies, 242 participants; low-certainty evidence). Seven of the 23 studies (with 801 participants) comparing a psychosocial intervention to an inactive control reported on adverse events, with 21 events indicated. Psychosocial interventions may not increase the risk of adverse events compared to controls, with a risk ratio of 1.92 (95% CI 0.30 to 12.41; 6 studies; 622 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We conducted an assessment of risk of bias using the RoB 2 tool on a total of 49 reported results. A high risk of bias affected 43% of PTSD results; 59% for depression symptoms; 40% for treatment dropout; and one-third for adverse events. The greatest sources of bias were problems with randomisation and missing outcome data. Heterogeneity was also high, ranging from I2 = 30% (adverse events) to I2 = 87% (PTSD). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Our review suggests that survivors of rape, sexual violence and sexual abuse during adulthood may experience a large reduction in post-treatment PTSD symptoms and depressive symptoms after experiencing a psychosocial intervention, relative to comparison groups. Psychosocial interventions do not seem to increase dropout from treatment or adverse events/effects compared to controls. However, the number of dropouts and study attrition were generally high, potentially missing harms of exposure to interventions and/or research participation. Also, the differential effects of specific intervention types needs further investigation. We conclude that a range of behavioural and CBT-based interventions may improve the mental health of survivors of rape, sexual assault and sexual abuse in the short term. Therefore, the needs and preferences of individuals must be considered in selecting suitable approaches to therapy and support. The primary outcome in this review focused on the post-treatment period and the question about whether benefits are sustained over time persists. However, attaining such evidence from studies that lack an active comparison may be impractical and even unethical. Thus, we suggest that studies undertake head-to-head comparisons of different intervention types; in particular, of novel, emerging therapies, with one-year plus follow-up periods. Additionally, researchers should focus on the therapeutic benefits and costs for subpopulations such as male survivors and those living with complex PTSD.

An evidence-based primary health care intervention to address domestic violence against women in Brazil: a mixed method evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Health systems have a critical role in a multi-sectoral response to domestic violence against women (DVAW). However, the evidence on interventions is skewed towards high income countries, and evidence based interventions are not easily transferred to low-and middle-income countries (LMIC) where significant social, cultural and economic differences exist. We evaluated feasibility and acceptability of implementation of an intervention (HERA-Healthcare Responding to Violence and Abuse) to improve the response to DVAW in two primary health care clinics (PHC) in Brazil. METHODS: The study design is a mixed method process and outcome evaluation, based on training attendance records, semi-structured interviews (with 13 Primary Health Care (PHC) providers, two clinic directors and two women who disclosed domestic violence), and identification and referral data from the Brazilian Epidemiological Surveillance System (SINAN). RESULTS: HERA was feasible and acceptable to women and PHC providers, increased providers' readiness to identify DVAW and diversified referrals outside the health system. The training enhanced the confidence and skills of PHC providers to ask directly about violence and respond to women's disclosures using a women centred, gender and human rights perspective. PHC providers felt safe and supported when dealing with DVAW because HERA emphasised clear roles and collective action within the clinical team. A number of challenges affected implementation including: differential managerial support for the Núcleo de Prevenção da Violência (Violence Prevention Nucleus-NPV) relating to the allocation of resources, monitoring progress and giving feedback; a lack of higher level institutional endorsement prioritising DVAW work; staff turnover; a lack of feedback from external support services to PHC clinics regarding DVAW cases; and inconsistent practices regarding documentation of DVAW. CONCLUSION: Training should be accompanied by system-wide institutional change including active (as opposed to passive) management support, allocation of resources to support roles within the NPV, locally adapted protocols and guidelines, monitoring progress and feedback. Communication and coordination with external support services and documentation systems are crucial and need improvement. DVAW should be prioritised within leadership and governance structures, for example, by including DVAW work as a specific commissioning goal.

General practice as a place to receive help for domestic abuse during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative interview study in England and Wales.

BACKGROUND: General practice is an important place for patients experiencing or perpetrating domestic violence and abuse (DVA), and for their children to seek and receive help. While the incidence of DVA may have increased during the COVID- 19 pandemic, there has been a reduction in DVA identifications and referrals to specialist services from general practice. Concurrently there has been the imposition of lockdown measures and a shift to remote care in general practices in the UK. AIM: To understand the patient perspective of seeking and receiving help for DVA in general practice during the COVID-19 pandemic. This was then compared with experiences of general practice healthcare professionals. DESIGN AND SETTING: A qualitative interview study in seven urban general practices in England and Wales, as part of a feasibility study of IRIS+, an integrated primary care DVA system-level training and support intervention. METHOD: Semi-structured interviews with 21 patients affected by DVA and 13 general practice healthcare professionals who had received IRIS+ training. Analysis involved a Framework approach. RESULTS: Patients recounted positive experiences of seeking help for DVA in general practice during the pandemic. However, there have been perceived problems with the availability of general practice and a strong preference for face-to-face consultations, over remote consultations, for the opportunities of non- verbal communication. There were also concerns from healthcare professionals regarding the invisibility of children affected by DVA. CONCLUSION: Perspectives of patients and their families affected by DVA should be prioritised in general practice service planning, including during periods of transition and change.

The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a group domestic abuse perpetrator programme: protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: In contrast to evidence for interventions supporting victim/survivors of domestic violence and abuse (DVA), the effectiveness of perpetrator programmes for reduction of abuse is uncertain. This study aims to estimate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a perpetrator programme for men. METHODS: Pragmatic two-group individually randomised controlled trial (RCT) with embedded process and economic evaluation. Five centres in southwest England and South Wales aim to recruit 316 (reduced from original target of 366) male domestic abuse perpetrators. These will be randomised 2:1 to a community-based domestic abuse perpetrator programme (DAPP) or usual care comparator with 12-month follow-up. Female partners/ex-partners will be invited to join the study. The intervention for men comprises 23 weekly sessions of a group programme delivered in voluntary sector domestic abuse services. The intervention for female partners/ex-partners is one-to-one support from a safety worker. Men allocated to usual care receive no intervention; however, they are free to access other services. Their partners/ex-partners will be signposted to support services. Data is collected at baseline, and 4, 8 and 12 months' follow-up. The primary outcome is men's self-reported abusive behaviour measured by the Abusive Behaviour Inventory (ABI-29) at 12 months. Secondary measures include physical and mental health status and resource use alongside the abuse measure ABI (ABI-R) for partners/ex-partners and criminal justice contact for men. A mixed methods process evaluation and qualitative study will explore mechanisms of effectiveness, judge fidelity to the intervention model using interviews and group observations. The economic evaluation, over a 1-year time horizon from three perspectives (health and social care, public sector and society), will employ a cost-consequences framework reporting costs alongside economic outcomes (Quality-Adjusted Life Years derived from EQ-5D-5L, SF-12 and CHU-9D, and ICECAP-A) as well as the primary and other secondary outcomes. DISCUSSION: This trial will provide evidence of the (cost)effectiveness of a DAPP. The embedded process evaluation will further insights in the experiences and contexts of participants and their journey through a perpetrator programme, and the study will seek to address the omission in other studies of economic evaluations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN15804282, April 1, 2019.

Family adversity and health characteristics associated with intimate partner violence in children and parents presenting to health care: a population-based birth cohort study in England.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the clinical characteristics of children and parents affected by intimate partner violence (IPV) presenting in health-care settings. We examined the associations between family adversities, health characteristics, and IPV in children and parents using linked electronic health records (EHRs) from primary and secondary care between 1 year before and 2 years after birth (the first 1000 days). We compared parental health problems in in children and parents with and without recorded IPV. METHODS: We developed a population-based birth cohort of children and parents (aged 14-60 years) in England, comprising linked EHRs from mother-child pairs (with no identified father) and mother-father-child triads. We followed the cohort across general practices (Clinical Practice Research Datalink GOLD), emergency departments, outpatient visits, hospital admissions, and mortality records. Family adversities included 33 clinical indicators of parental mental health problems, parental substance misuse, adverse family environments, and high-risk child maltreatment-related presentations. Parental health problems included 12 common comorbidities, ranging from diabetes and cardiovascular diseases to chronic pain or digestive diseases. We used adjusted and weighted logistic-regression models to estimate the probability of IPV (per 100 children and parents) associated with each adversity, and period prevalences of parental health problems associated with IPV. FINDINGS: We included 129 948 children and parents, comprising 95 290 (73·3%) mother-father-child triads and 34 658 (26·7%) mother-child pairs only between April 1, 2007, and Jan 29, 2020. An estimated 2689 (2·1%) of 129 948 children and parents (95% CI 2·0-2·3) had recorded IPV and 54 758 (41·2%; 41·5-42·2) had any family adversity between 1 year before and 2 years after birth. All family adversities were significantly associated with IPV. Most parents and children with IPV had recorded adversities (1612 [60·0%] of 2689) before their first IPV recording. The probability of IPV was 0·6 per 100 children and parents (95% CI 0·5-0·6) with no adversity, increasing to 4·4 per 100 children per parents (4·2-4·7) with one adversity, and up to 15·1 per 100 parents and children (13·6-16·5) with three of more adversities. Mothers with IPV had a significantly higher prevalence of both physical (73·4% vs 63·1%, odds ratio [OR] 1·6, 95% CI 1·4-1·8) and mental health problems (58·4% vs 22·2%, OR 4·9, 4·4-5·5) than mothers without IPV. Fathers with IPV had a higher prevalence of mental health problems (17·8% vs 7·1%, OR 2·8, 2·4-3·2) and similar prevalences of physical health problems than those without IPV (29·6% vs 32·4%, OR 0·9, 0·8-1·0). INTERPRETATION: Two in five of the children and parents presenting to health care had recorded parental mental health problems, parental substance misuse, adverse family environments, or high-risk presentations of maltreatment in the first 1000 days. One in 22 children and parents with family adversity also had recorded IPV before age 2 years. Primary and secondary care staff should safely ask about IPV when parents or children present with family adversity or health problems associated with IPV, and respond appropriately. FUNDING: NIHR Policy Research Programme.

Dentistry responding in domestic violence and abuse (DRiDVA) feasibility study: a qualitative evaluation of the implementation experiences of dental professionals.

BACKGROUND: Domestic Violence and Abuse (DVA) is a persistent public health problem in the UK. Healthcare settings offer an opportunity to ask patients about DVA, either opportunistically or in response to the presence of injuries. However, it has been suggested that dental practices and dental teams have not been actively involved supporting adult patients when presenting with injuries that might have resulted from DVA. This qualitative study was conducted to satisfy the evaluative component of the Dentistry Responding in Domestic Violence and Abuse (DRiDVA) feasibility study. METHODS: In total, 30 participants took part in the study; nine associate dentists and practice principals/owners took part in one-to-one interviews and 21 auxiliary staff took part across two focus group discussion sessions. Data were analysed using the seven step Framework Analysis process. RESULT: Three key themes were identified from the data, focusing on barriers to enquiring about domestic violence and abuse, Facilitators of identification and referral of DVA in dental settings, and recommendations for further adaptation of intervention to dental settings. CONCLUSION: DVA training coupled with robust referral pathways to a named specialist DVA advocate increases knowledge and awareness of the signs of DVA and confidence in making onward referrals. Further research is needed to understand how to increase dental professional willingness to ask patients about DVA.

Trauma-informed co-production: Collaborating and combining expertise to improve access to primary care with women with complex needs.

INTRODUCTION: Health, social care, charitable and justice sectors are increasingly recognising the need for trauma-informed services that seek to recognise signs of trauma, provide appropriate paths to recovery and ensure that services enable people rather than retraumatise. Foundational to the development of trauma-informed services is collaboration with people with lived experience of trauma. Co-production principles may provide a useful framework for this collaboration, due to their emphasis on lived experience, and intent to address power imbalances and promote equity. This article aims to examine trauma-informed and co-production principles to consider the extent to which they overlap and explore how to tailor co-production approaches to support people who have experienced trauma. METHODS: Bridging Gaps is a collaboration between women who have experienced complex trauma, a charity that supports them, primary care clinicians and health researchers to improve access to trauma-informed primary care. Using co-production principles, we aimed to ensure that women who have experienced trauma were key decision-makers throughout the project. Through reflective notes (n = 19), observations of meetings (n = 3), interviews with people involved in the project (n = 9) and reflective group discussions on our experiences, we share learning, successes and failures. Data analysis followed a framework approach, using trauma-informed principles. RESULTS: Co-production processes can require adaptation when working with people who have experienced trauma. We emphasise the need for close partnership working, flexibility and transparency around power dynamics, paying particular attention to aspects of power that are less readily visible. Sharing experiences can retrigger trauma. People conducting co-production work need to understand trauma and how this may impact upon an individual's sense of psychological safety. Long-term funding is vital to enable projects to have enough time for the establishment of trust and delivery of tangible results. CONCLUSIONS: Co-production principles are highly suitable when developing trauma-informed services. Greater consideration needs to be given as to whether and how people share lived experiences, the need for safe spaces, honesty and humility, difficult dynamics between empowerment and safety and whether and when blurring boundaries may be helpful. Our findings have applicability to policy-making, funding and service provision to enable co-production processes to become more trauma-informed. PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Bridging Gaps was started by a group of women who have experienced complex trauma, including addiction, homelessness, mental health problems, sexual exploitation, domestic and sexual violence and poverty, with a general practitioner (GP) who provides healthcare to this population, alongside a support worker from the charity One25, a charity that supports some of the most marginalised women in Bristol to heal and thrive. More GPs and healthcare researchers joined the group and they have been meeting fortnightly for a period of 4 years with the aim of improving access to trauma-informed primary care. The group uses co-production principles to work together, and we aim to ensure that women who have experienced trauma are key decision-makers throughout our work together. This article is a summary of our learning, informed by discussion, observations and interviews with members of the group.

Factors mitigating the harmful effects of intimate partner violence on adolescents' depressive symptoms-A longitudinal birth cohort study.

Background: Preventing parental intimate partner violence (IPV) or mitigating its negative effects early in the lifecourse is likely to improve population mental health. However, prevention of IPV is highly challenging and we know very little about how the mental health of children exposed to IPV can be improved. This study assessed the extent to which positive experiences were associated with depressive symptoms among children with and without experience of IPV. Method: This study used data from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children, a population-based birth cohort. After excluding those without information on depressive symptoms at age 18, the final sample comprised 4490 participants. Parental intimate partner violence (physical or emotional cruelty reported by mother or partner) when the cohort child was aged 2-9 years. Depressive symptoms were measured with the Short Mood and Feelings Questionnaire (SMFQ) at age 18 years. Results: Each additional report of parental intimate partner violence (over six reports) was associated with 0.047 (95% CI 0.027-0.066), or 4.7%, higher SMFQ score. Conversely, each additional positive experience (over 11 domains) was linked with -0.042 (95% CI -0.060 to -0.025) or 4.1%, lower SMFQ score. Among those with parental intimate partner violence (19.6% of participants), relationship with peers (effect size = 3.5%), school enjoyment (effect size = 1.2%), neighbourhood safety and cohesion (effect size = 1.8%) were associated with lower levels of depressive symptoms. Conclusions: Most positive experiences were linked with lower levels of depressive symptoms regardless of parental intimate partner violence exposure. However, among those with parental IPV, this association was found only for relationships with peers, school enjoyment, neighbourhood safety and cohesion on depressive symptoms. If our findings are assumed to be causal, nurturing these factors may mitigate the harmful effects of parental intimate partner violence on depressive symptoms in adolescence.

Trauma-specific mindfulness-based cognitive therapy for women with post-traumatic stress disorder and a history of domestic abuse: intervention refinement and a randomised feasibility trial (coMforT study).

BACKGROUND: Women who have experienced domestic violence and abuse (DVA) are at increased risk of developing post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and complex PTSD (CPTSD). In 2014-2015, we developed a prototype trauma-specific mindfulness-based cognitive therapy curriculum (TS-MBCT) for the treatment of PTSD in a DVA population. This study aimed to refine the prototype TS-MBCT and evaluate the feasibility of conducting a randomised controlled trial (RCT) testing its effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. METHODS: Intervention refinement phase was informed by evidence synthesis from a literature review, qualitative interviews with professionals and DVA survivors, and a consensus exercise with experts in trauma and mindfulness. We tested the refined TS-MBCT intervention in an individually randomised parallel group feasibility trial with pre-specified progression criteria, a traffic light system, and embedded process and health economics evaluations. RESULTS: The TS-MBCT intervention consisted of eight group sessions and home practice. We screened 109 women in a DVA agency and recruited 20 (15 TS-MBCT, 5 self-referral to National Health Service (NHS) psychological treatment), with 80% follow-up at 6 months. Our TS-MBCT intervention had 73% uptake, 100% retention, and high acceptability. Participants suggested recruitment via multiple agencies, and additional safety measures. Randomisation into the NHS control arm did not work due to long waiting lists and previous negative experiences. Three self-administered PTSD/CPTSD questionnaires produced differing outcomes thus a clinician administered measure might work better. We met six out of nine feasibility progression criteria at green and three at amber targets demonstrating that it is possible to conduct a full-size RCT of the TS-MBCT intervention after making minor amendments to recruitment and randomisation procedures, the control intervention, primary outcomes measures, and intervention content. At 6 months, none of the PTSD/CPTSD outcomes ruled out a clinically important difference between trial arms indicating that it is reasonable to proceed to a full-size RCT to estimate these outcomes with greater precision. CONCLUSIONS: A future RCT of the coMforT TS-MBCT intervention should have an internal pilot, recruit from multiple DVA agencies, NHS and non-NHS settings, have an active control psychological treatment, use robust randomisation and safety procedures, and clinician-administered measures for PTSD/CPTSD. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN64458065 11/01/2019.

Methodological Challenges in Group-based Randomised Controlled Trials for Intimate Partner Violence Perpetrators: A Meta-summary.

Evidence for treatment effects of group-based Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) perpetrators programmes remains, at best, inconclusive. In the present review, systematic/meta-analytic reviews were used to identify randomised controlled trials and a meta-summary approach was employed to identify methodological challenges in the design and conduct of these trials. Of the fifteen studies identified, seven were comparative effectiveness trials. A range of methodological challenges were also identified by the trialists; source of outcome data, treatment modality, attrition and sample characteristics were the most frequently mentioned. Although there are only a few randomised controlled trials compared to non randomised studies, the findings of both highlight the need to invest in the development of innovative and/or combined IPV treatment programmes to address co-occurring issues such as substance use and trauma. The summary of methodological challenges will provide the first step in the development of methods guidance for researchers working in this area.

La evidencia del efecto del tratamiento de los programas de intervención grupal para agresores de pareja (IPV) siguen siendo, en el mejor de los casos, no concluyentes. En la presente revisión se emplearon revisiones sistemáticas/meta-analíticas para identificar ensayos controlados aleatorizados y se empleó un enfoque de meta-resumen para identificar los desafíos metodológicos en el diseño y la realización de estos ensayos. De los quince estudios identificados, siete fueron ensayos de comparación de la efectividad. Los autores de los ensayos también identificaron una serie de desafíos metodológicos: la fuente de la que se obtienen los datos relativos a los resultados, la modalidad de tratamiento, la mortalidad de la muestra y sus características fueron los mencionados con más frecuencia. Aunque son todavía escasos los ensayos controlados aleatorizados en comparación con los estudios no aleatorizados, los resultados de ambos tipos de estudios han destacado la importancia de invertir en el desarrollo de programas de tratamiento de IPV innovadores y/o combinados para tratar problemáticas conjuntas tales como consumo de substancias y trauma. El resumen de los desafíos metodológicos proporcionará el primer paso para el desarrollo de guías metodológicas para los investigadores que trabajan en este área.

Young People and Intimate Partner Violence: Experiences of Institutional Support and Services in England.

Purpose: Young people (YP) are at greater risk of experiencing intimate partner violence and abuse (IPVA), with high prevalence rates at 18-25 years and potentially severe short and long-term health and social impacts. YP often view adult support services as not for them and more research is needed to understand effective responses to IPVA among different groups. Methods: Semi-structured interviews alongside Life History Calendars were undertaken to explore 18 young peoples' (18-25 years) experiences of community and service level responses to their IPVA between 2019-2020. Thematic analysis and case studies were carried out. Results: Participant accounts commonly described what did or did not help within: education; primary care physicians and maternity services; third sector or non-government support organisations; and counselling and support workers. YP wanted clearer information on identifying abuse from a younger age in schools and better access and signposting to specialist services. They benefited the most from equal power dynamics in relationships with professionals where they were supported to make their own decisions. Conclusions: Professionals in all sectors (including schools) need IPVA trauma-informed training that encourages equal power dynamics, with a clear understanding of and access to referral pathways, to be able to respond to the needs of YP experiencing IPVA.

Adapting domestic abuse training to remote delivery during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative study of views from general practice and support services.

BACKGROUND: Identifying and responding to patients affected by domestic violence and abuse (DVA) is vital in primary care. There may have been a rise in the reporting of DVA cases during the COVID-19 pandemic and associated lockdown measures. Concurrently general practice adopted remote working that extended to training and education. IRIS (Identification and Referral to Improve Safety) is an example of an evidence-based UK healthcare training support and referral programme, focusing on DVA. IRIS transitioned to remote delivery during the pandemic. AIM: To understand the adaptations and impact of remote DVA training in IRIS-trained general practices by exploring perspectives of those delivering and receiving training. DESIGN AND SETTING: Qualitative interviews and observation of remote training of general practice teams in England were undertaken. METHOD: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 21 participants (three practice managers, three reception and administrative staff, eight general practice clinicians, and seven specialist DVA staff), alongside observation of eight remote training sessions. Analysis was conducted using a framework approach. RESULTS: Remote DVA training in UK general practice widened access to learners. However, it may have reduced learner engagement compared with face-to-face training and may challenge safeguarding of remote learners who are domestic abuse survivors. DVA training is integral to the partnership between general practice and specialist DVA services, and reduced engagement risks weakening this partnership. CONCLUSION: The authors recommend a hybrid DVA training model for general practice, including remote information delivery alongside a structured face-to-face element. This has broader relevance for other specialist services providing training and education in primary care.