Department of General Practice, University of Melbourne, Carlton, Vic 3010, Australia.
BMJ. 2014 May 12;348:g2913. doi: 10.1136/bmj.g2913.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
考察在医疗保健环境中进行亲密伴侣暴力筛查的效果,以确定筛查是否能提高对支持机构的识别和转介率,改善妇女的健康状况,减少进一步的暴力行为,或造成伤害。
对评估筛查效果的试验进行系统评价和荟萃分析。两位作者独立进行了研究评估、数据提取和质量评估。计算了风险比和 95%置信区间的标准化估计值。
截至 2012 年 7 月,在 9 个数据库(CENTRAL、Medline、Medline(R)、Embase、DARE、CINAHL、PsycINFO、Sociological Abstracts 和 ASSIA)中进行了搜索,并在 5 个试验登记处进行了搜索,直到 2010 年。
涉及所有年龄≥16 岁在医疗保健环境中就诊的妇女的亲密伴侣暴力筛查计划的随机或半随机试验。我们仅纳入了研究,其中干预组的临床医生亲自进行了筛查,或在咨询时获悉了筛查结果,而不是常规护理(或不筛查)。排除了那些紧随筛查计划之后进行了结构干预(如倡导或治疗干预)的筛查计划的研究。
确定了 11 项符合条件的试验(n=13027)。在 6 项汇总研究(n=3564)中,筛查增加了亲密伴侣暴力的识别(风险比 2.33,95%置信区间 1.39 至 3.89),尤其是在产前环境中(4.26,1.76 至 10.31)。基于三项研究(n=1400),我们没有发现筛查会增加向家庭暴力支持服务机构转介的证据(2.67,0.99 至 7.20)。只有两项研究测量了妇女在筛查后的暴力经历(在筛查后 3 至 18 个月),没有发现亲密伴侣暴力的减少。一项研究报告称,筛查不会造成伤害。
尽管筛查可能会增加医疗保健环境中亲密伴侣暴力的识别率,但相对于这种暴力的最佳估计发生率,筛查的识别率较低。尚不确定筛查是否会增加对支持机构的有效转介。在短期内,筛查似乎不会造成伤害,但只有一项研究测量了伤害。由于主要研究没有发现筛查对亲密伴侣暴力妇女的结果有所改善,因此没有足够的证据支持在医疗保健环境中进行筛查。需要比较筛查与病例发现的研究,或筛查与治疗干预相结合对妇女长期健康状况的研究,以确定在医疗保健环境中实施识别政策的依据。