Buri Hilary M, Daly Jeanette M, Jogerst Gerald J
Department of Family Medicine, Carver College of Medicine, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa 52242, USA.
J Elder Abuse Negl. 2009 Jan-Mar;21(1):58-73. doi: 10.1080/08946560802571912.
(a) To identify reliable and valid questions that identify elder abuse, (b) to assess the reliability and validity of extant self-reported elder abuse screens in a high-risk elderly population, and (c) to describe difficulties of completing and interpreting screens in a high-need elderly population.
All elders referred to research-trained social workers in a community service agency were asked to participate. Of the 70 elders asked, 49 participated, 44 completed the first questionnaire, and 32 completed the duplicate second questionnaire. A research assistant administered the telephone questionnaires.
Twenty-nine (42%) persons were judged abused, 12 (17%) had abuse reported, and 4 (6%) had abuse substantiated. The elder abuse screen instruments were not found to be predictive of assessed abuse or as predictors of reported abuse; the measures tended toward being inversely predictive. Two questions regarding harm and taking of belongings were significantly different for the assessed abused group.
In this small group of high-need community-dwelling elders, the screens were not effective in discriminating between abused and nonabused groups. Better instruments are needed to assess for elder abuse.
(a) 识别用于识别老年人受虐情况的可靠且有效的问题;(b) 评估现有自我报告的老年人受虐情况筛查工具在高危老年人群中的信度和效度;(c) 描述在高需求老年人群中完成和解读筛查工具的困难。
邀请所有转介至社区服务机构中接受过研究培训的社会工作者的老年人参与。在邀请的70位老年人中,49位参与,44位完成了第一份问卷,32位完成了重复的第二份问卷。一名研究助理负责进行电话问卷调查。
29人(42%)被判定受虐,12人(17%)有受虐报告,4人(6%)受虐情况得到证实。未发现老年人受虐情况筛查工具可预测评估出的受虐情况或作为受虐报告的预测指标;这些测量指标往往呈现出反向预测的趋势。对于评估出的受虐组,两个关于伤害和财物拿走情况的问题存在显著差异。
在这一小群高需求的社区居住老年人中,筛查工具在区分受虐组和未受虐组方面无效。需要更好的工具来评估老年人受虐情况。