School of Social Work, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, United States of America.
Firearm Injury & Policy Research Program, Seattle, Washington, United States of America.
PLoS One. 2023 Dec 29;18(12):e0288880. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0288880. eCollection 2023.
Extreme risk protection orders (ERPO) seek to temporarily reduce access to firearms for individuals at imminent risk of harming themselves and/or others. Clinicians, including physicians, nurse practitioners, and social workers regularly assess circumstances related to patients' risk of firearm-related harm in the context of providing routine and acute clinical care. While clinicians cannot independently file ERPOs in most states, they can counsel patients or contact law enforcement about filing ERPOs. This study sought to understand clinicians' perspectives about integrating ERPO counseling and contacting law enforcement about ERPOs into their clinical workflow. We analyzed responses to open-ended questions from an online survey distributed May-July of 2021 to all licensed physicians (n = 23,051), nurse practitioners (n = 8,049), and social workers (n = 6,910) in Washington state. Of the 4,242 survey participants, 1,126 (26.5%) responded to at least one of ten open-ended questions. Two coders conducted content analysis. Clinicians identified barriers and facilitators to integrating ERPOs into the clinical workflow; these influenced their preferences on who should counsel or contact law enforcement about ERPOs. Barriers included perceptions of professional scope, knowledge gaps, institutional barriers, perceived ERPO effectiveness and constitutionality, concern for safety (clinician and patient), and potential for damaging provider-patient therapeutic relationship. Facilitators to address these barriers included trainings and resources, dedicated time for counseling and remuneration for time spent counseling, education on voluntary removal options, and ability to refer patients to another clinician. Participants who were hesitant to be the primary clinician to counsel patients or contact law enforcement about ERPOs requested the ability to refer patients to a specialist, such as social workers or a designated ERPO specialist. Results highlight the complex perspectives across clinician types regarding the integration of ERPO counseling into the clinical workflow. We highlight areas to be addressed for clinicians to engage with ERPOs.
极端风险保护令(ERPO)旨在暂时限制即将伤害自己和/或他人的个人获取枪支的途径。临床医生,包括医生、护士从业者和社会工作者,在提供常规和急性临床护理的过程中,经常评估与患者枪支伤害风险相关的情况。虽然在大多数州,临床医生不能独立提交 ERPO,但他们可以为患者提供咨询或联系执法部门提交 ERPO。本研究旨在了解临床医生将 ERPO 咨询和联系执法部门提交 ERPO 纳入其临床工作流程的观点。我们分析了 2021 年 5 月至 7 月期间向华盛顿州所有持照医生(n=23051)、护士从业者(n=8049)和社会工作者(n=6910)分发的在线调查中对开放式问题的回答。在 4242 名调查参与者中,有 1126 名(26.5%)至少回答了十个开放式问题中的一个。两名编目员进行了内容分析。临床医生确定了将 ERPO 纳入临床工作流程的障碍和促进因素;这些因素影响了他们对谁应该为 ERPO 咨询或联系执法部门的偏好。障碍包括对专业范围、知识差距、机构障碍、对 ERPO 有效性和宪法性的看法、对安全(临床医生和患者)的关注,以及破坏提供者-患者治疗关系的可能性。解决这些障碍的促进因素包括培训和资源、咨询的专用时间以及咨询时间的报酬、自愿移除选择的教育,以及将患者转介给另一位临床医生的能力。对于不愿意作为主要临床医生为患者提供 ERPO 咨询或联系执法部门的参与者,他们要求有能力将患者转介给专家,如社会工作者或指定的 ERPO 专家。结果突出了不同类型临床医生在将 ERPO 咨询纳入临床工作流程方面的复杂观点。我们强调了临床医生参与 ERPO 时需要解决的领域。