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
. 2012 Oct 23:12:167.
doi: 10.1186/1471-2431-12-167.

Facilitators and barriers to screening for child abuse in the emergency department

Affiliations

Facilitators and barriers to screening for child abuse in the emergency department

Eveline C F M Louwers et al. BMC Pediatr. .

Abstract

Background: To identify facilitators of, and barriers to, screening for child abuse in emergency departments (ED) through interviews with ED staff, members of the hospital Board, and related experts.

Methods: This qualitative study is based on semi-structured interviews with 27 professionals from seven Dutch hospitals (i.e. seven pediatricians, two surgeons, six ED nurses, six ED managers and six hospital Board members). The resulting list of facilitators/barriers was subsequently discussed with five experts in child abuse and one implementation expert. The results are ordered using the Child Abuse Framework of the Dutch Health Care Inspectorate that legally requires screening for child abuse.

Results: Lack of knowledge of child abuse, communication with parents in the case of suspected abuse, and lack of time for development of policy and cases are barriers for ED staff to screen for child abuse. For Board members, lack of means and time, and a high turnover of ED staff are impediments to improving their child abuse policy. Screening can be promoted by training ED staff to better recognize child abuse, improving communication skills, appointing an attendant specifically for child abuse, explicit support of the screening policy by management, and by national implementation of an approved protocol and validated screening instrument.

Conclusions: ED staff are motivated to work according to the Dutch Health Care Inspectorate requirements but experiences many barriers, particularly communication with parents of children suspected of being abused. Introduction of a national child abuse protocol can improve screening on child abuse at EDs.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Euser EM, van Ijzendoorn MH, Prinzie P, Bakermans-Kranenburg MJ. Prevalence of child maltreatment in The Netherlands. Child Maltreat. 2010;15(1):5–17. doi: 10.1177/1077559509345904. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Meerding WJ. In: Kindermishandeling, de politiek een zorg. Baartmans HEM, Bullens RAR, Willems JCM, editor. Amsterdam: SWP; 2005. De maatschappelijke kosten van kindermishandeling; pp. 46–62.
    1. Gilbert R, Widom CS, Browne K, Fergusson D, Webb E, Janson S. Burden and consequences of child maltreatment in high-income countries. Lancet. 2009;373(9657):68–81. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(08)61706-7. - DOI - PubMed
    1. van der Wal G. Afdeling spoedeisende hulp van ziekenhuizen signaleert kindermishandeling nog onvoldoende: gebroken arm nog te vaak een ongelukje. The Hague: Inspectie voor de Gezondheidszorg; 2008.
    1. Jeugdzorg N. Overzicht 2010 Advies- en Meldpunten Kindermishandeling (AMK) Utrecht: Jeugdzorg Nederland; 2011.

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources