Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2006 Apr;56(525):249-57.

Increased awareness of intimate partner abuse after training: a randomised controlled trial

Sylvie Lo Fo Wong  1 , Fred Wester, Saskia S L Mol, Toine L M Lagro-Janssen
Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Increased awareness of intimate partner abuse after training: a randomised controlled trial

Sylvie Lo Fo Wong et al. Br J Gen Pract. 2006 Apr.

Abstract

Background: Intimate partner abuse is very common among female patients in family practice. In general, doctors overlook the possibility of partner abuse.

Aim: To investigate whether awareness of intimate partner abuse, as well as active questioning, increase after attending focus group and training, or focus group only.

Design of study: Randomised controlled trial in a stratified sample.

Setting: Family practices in Rotterdam and surrounding areas.

Method: A full-training group (n = 23), a group attending focus group discussions alone (n = 14), and a control group (n = 17) were formed. Data were collected with incident reporting of every female patient (aged >18 years) that was suspected of, or presented, partner abuse during a period of 6 months. The primary outcome measure was the number of reported patients; the secondary outcome measure was the number of patients with whom the GP had non-obvious reasons to suspect/discuss abuse.

Results: Comparison of the full-training group (n = 87 patients) versus the control group (n = 14 patients) resulted in a rate ratio of 4.54 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.55 to 8.09, P <0.001); the focus group only group (n = 30 cases) versus control group: rate ratio of 2.2 (95% CI = 1.14 to 4.26, P = 0.019); full-training versus the focus group only group: rate ratio of 2.19 (95% CI = 1.36 to 3.52, P = 0.001). Comparison of the fulltraining group with the untrained groups for awareness of partner abuse in case of non-obvious signs resulted in: odds ratio 5.92 (95% CI = 2.25 to 15.62, P <0.01) all corrected for sex, district, practice setting, working part/full-time, experience, and age of the doctor.

Conclusions: Training was the most significant determinant to improve awareness and identification of intimate partner abuse. Active questioning increased, especially where there were non-obvious signs. The focus group on its own doubled the awareness of partner abuse.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Design intervention study.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Signs (in percentages) to suspect/discuss intimate partner abuse, per study group.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Percentages obvious versus non-obvious signs to suspect/discuss intimate partner abuse, per study group.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Watts C, Zimmerman C. Violence against women: global scope and magnitude. Lancet. 2002;359:1232–1237. - PubMed
    1. Hegarty KL, Bush R. Prevalence and associations of partner abuse in women attending general practice: a cross-sectional survey. Aust N Z J Public Health. 2002;26(5):437–442. - PubMed
    1. Bradley F, Smith M, Long J, O'Dowd T. Reported frequency of domestic violence: cross sectional survey of women attending general practice. BMJ. 2002;324:271. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Richardson J, Coid J, Petruckevitch A, et al. Identifying domestic violence: cross sectional study in primary care. BMJ. 2002;324:274. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Cohen S, De Vos E, Newberger E. Barriers to physician identification and treatment of family violence: lessons from five communities. Acad Med. 1997;72(1 Suppl):S19–25. - PubMed

Publication types