Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Division of Violence Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
JAMA. 2012 Aug 15;308(7):681-9. doi: 10.1001/jama.2012.6434.
Although partner violence screening has been endorsed by many health organizations, there is insufficient evidence that it has beneficial health outcomes.
To determine the effect of computerized screening for partner violence plus provision of a partner violence resource list vs provision of a partner violence list only on women's health in primary care settings, compared with a control group.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A 3-group blinded randomized controlled trial at 10 primary health care centers in Cook County, Illinois. Participants were enrolled from May 2009-April 2010 and reinterviewed 1 year (range, 48-56 weeks) later. Participants were English- or Spanish-speaking women meeting specific inclusion criteria and seeking clinical services at study sites. Of 3537 women approached, 2727 were eligible, 2708 were randomized (99%), and 2364 (87%) were recontacted 1 year later. Mean age of participants was 39 years. Participants were predominantly non-Latina African American (55%) or Latina (37%), had a high school education or less (57%), and were uninsured (57%).
Randomization into 3 intervention groups: (1) partner violence screen (using the Partner Violence Screen instrument) plus a list of local partner violence resources if screening was positive (n = 909); (2) partner violence resource list only without screen (n = 893); and (3) no-screen, no-partner violence list control group (n=898).
Quality of life (QOL, physical and mental health components) was the primary outcome, measured on the 12-item Short Form (scale range 0-100, mean of 50 for US population).
At 1-year follow-up, there were no significant differences in the QOL physical health component between the screen plus partner violence resource list group (n = 801; mean score, 46.8; 95% CI, 46.1-47.4), the partner violence resource list only group (n = 772; mean score, 46.4; 95% CI, 45.8-47.1), and the control group (n = 791; mean score, 47.2; 95% CI, 46.5-47.8), or in the mental health component (screen plus partner violence resource list group [mean score, 48.3; 95% CI, 47.5-49.1], the partner violence resource list only group [mean score, 48.0; 95% CI, 47.2-48.9], and the control group [mean score, 47.8; 95% CI, 47.0-48.6]). There were also no differences between groups in days unable to work or complete housework; number of hospitalizations, emergency department, or ambulatory care visits; proportion who contacted a partner violence agency; or recurrence of partner violence.
Among women receiving care in primary care clinics, providing a partner violence resource list with or without screening did not result in improved health.
clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00526994.
尽管许多健康组织都认可伴侣暴力筛查,但并没有足够的证据表明它对健康有有益的结果。
确定计算机化的伴侣暴力筛查加上提供伴侣暴力资源清单与仅提供伴侣暴力清单相比,对初级保健环境中妇女的健康有何影响,与对照组相比。
设计、地点和参与者:伊利诺伊州库克县 10 个初级保健中心的 3 组盲随机对照试验。参与者于 2009 年 5 月至 2010 年 4 月入组,并在 1 年后(范围 48-56 周)进行重新访谈。参与者为符合特定纳入标准并在研究地点寻求临床服务的英语或西班牙语讲者的女性。在接触的 3537 名女性中,有 2727 名符合条件,2708 名被随机分组(99%),2364 名(87%)在 1 年后再次联系。参与者的平均年龄为 39 岁。参与者主要是非拉丁裔非裔美国人(55%)或拉丁裔(37%),具有高中或以下学历(57%),并且没有保险(57%)。
随机分为 3 个干预组:(1)伴侣暴力筛查(使用伴侣暴力筛查工具),如果筛查阳性则提供当地伴侣暴力资源清单(n=909);(2)仅提供伴侣暴力资源清单而不进行筛查(n=893);(3)无筛查、无伴侣暴力清单对照组(n=898)。
生活质量(QOL,身体和心理健康成分)是主要结局,使用 12 项简短形式(量表范围 0-100,美国人口平均值为 50)进行测量。
在 1 年的随访中,筛查加伴侣暴力资源清单组(n=801;平均得分 46.8;95%CI 46.1-47.4)、伴侣暴力资源清单仅组(n=772;平均得分 46.4;95%CI 45.8-47.1)和对照组(n=791;平均得分 47.2;95%CI 46.5-47.8)之间,QOL 身体心理健康成分或心理健康成分均无显著差异,或在精神健康成分方面(筛查加伴侣暴力资源清单组[平均得分 48.3;95%CI 47.5-49.1]、伴侣暴力资源清单仅组[平均得分 48.0;95%CI 47.2-48.9]和对照组[平均得分 47.8;95%CI 47.0-48.6])。在无法工作或完成家务的天数、住院、急诊或门诊就诊次数、联系伴侣暴力机构的比例或伴侣暴力复发方面,各组之间也没有差异。
在接受初级保健诊所护理的女性中,提供伴侣暴力资源清单无论是否进行筛查,都不会改善健康状况。
clinicaltrials.gov 标识符:NCT00526994。