Researchers have found that medical students who have received training on intimate partner violence (IPV) report greater comfort with screening for IPV and improved IPV interviewing skills than their counterparts. However, less is known about medical students’ beliefs toward screening female patients for IPV and behavioral intention to screen. Semistructured, qualitative interviews were conducted with medical students to assess their beliefs, using the theory of planned behavior and social cognitive theory as theoretical frameworks for the interview questions. Most students felt that screening for IPV could help identify victims but could also potentially offend patients. Perceived barriers to screening included time and negative patient reactions, while perceived facilitators to screening included receiving IPV training and provision of IPV screening questionnaires while interviewing patients. Interviewees identified physicians as both supporters and nonsupporters of IPV screening. Behavioral intention scores ranged from 17 to 50 out of a possible 11 to 55. Findings from the study can help inform the IPV training needs of medical students.
BhandariM.DosanjhS.TornettaP.MatthewsD. (2006). Musculoskeletal manifestations of physical abuse after intimate partner violence. Journal of Trauma Injury, Infection, and Critical Care, 61, 1473-1479.
2.
BlackM. C. (2011). Intimate partner violence and adverse health consequences: Implications for clinicians. American Journal of Lifestyle Medicine, 5, 428-439.
3.
BlackM. C.BasileK. C.BreidingM. J.SmithS. G.WaltersM. L.MerrickM. T.. . . StevensM. R. (2011). The National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey (NISVS): 2010 summary report. Atlanta, GA: National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Retrieved from www.cdc.gov/ViolencePrevention/pdf/NISVS_Report2010-a.pdf
4.
ChangJ.DeckerM.MoraccoK.MartinS.PetersenR.FrasierP. (2005). Asking about intimate partner violence: Advice from female survivors to health care providers. Patient Education and Counseling, 59, 141-147.
5.
CohnF.SalmonM.StoboJ. (2002). Confronting chronic neglect: The education and training of health professionals on family violence. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
6.
ConnorP. D.NouerS. S.MackeyS. N.BanetM. S.TiptonN. G. (2012). Intimate partner violence education for medical students: Toward a comprehensive curriculum revision. Southern Medical Journal, 105, 211-215.
7.
EloS.KyngasH. (2007). The qualitative content analysis process. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 62, 107-115.
8.
Family Violence Prevention Fund. (1999). Preventing domestic violence: Clinical guidelines on routine screening. San Francisco, CA: Author.
9.
Family Violence Prevention Fund. (2004). National Consensus Guidelines on identifying and responding to domestic violence victimization in health care settings. San Francisco, CA: Author.
10.
FishbeinM. (2000). The role of theory in HIV prevention. AIDS Care, 12, 273-278.
11.
FrankE.ElonL.SaltzmannL.HouryD.McMahonP.DoyleJ. (2006). Clinical and personal intimate partner violence training experiences of U.S. medical students. Journal of Women’s Health, 15, 1071-1079.
12.
Futures Without Violence. (2013). Mandatory reporting of domestic violence to law enforcement by health care providers: A guide for advocates working to respond to or amend reporting laws related to domestic violence. San Francisco, CA: Author.
13.
HeronS.HassaniD.HouryD.QuestT.AnderD. (2010). Standardized patients to teach medical students about intimate partner violence. Western Journal of Emergency Medicine, 11, 500-505.
14.
Liaison Committee on Medical Education. (2011, May). Educational program for the M.D. degree. In Functions and structure of a medical school: Standards for accreditation of medical education programs leading to the M.D. degree (ED-21, pp. 6-16). Washington, DC: Author.
15.
MacQueenK. M.McLellanE.KayK.MilsteinB. (1998). Codebook development for team-based qualitative analysis. Cultural Anthropology Methods Journal, 10(2), 31-36.
16.
MaxwellJ. (2008). Designing a qualitative study. In BickmanL.RogD. (Eds.), The handbook of applied social research methods (2nd ed., pp. 214-253). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
17.
MiddlestadtS.BattacharyyaK.RosenbaumJ.FishbeinM.ShepherdM. (1996). The use of theory based semistructured eliciation questionnaires: Formative research for CDC’s prevention marketing initiative. Public Health Reports, 111(Suppl. 1), 18-27.
18.
MontañoD.KasprzykD. (2008). Theory of reasoned action, theory of planned behavior, and the integrated behavioral model. In GlanzK.RimerB.ViswanathK. (Eds.), Health behavior and health education: Theory, research, and practice (Vol. 4, pp. 67-96). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
19.
MurrayC. E.MobleyA. K.BufordA. P.Seaman-DeJohnM. M. (2007). Same-sex intimate partner violence: Dynamics, social context, and counseling implications. The Journal of LGBT Issues in Counseling, 1(4), 7-30.
20.
PlichtaS. (2007). Interactions between victims of intimate partner violence against women and the health care system: Policy and practice implications. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 5, 226-239.
21.
RivaraF.AndersonM.FishmanP.BonomiA.ReidR.CarrellD.ThompsonR. S. (2007). Intimate partner violence and health care costs and utilization for children living in the home. Pediatrics, 120, 1270-1277.
22.
StaytonC.DuncanM. (2005). Mutable influences on intimate partner abuse screening in healthcare settings: A synthesis of the literature. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 6, 271-285.
23.
ThurmondV. (2001). The point of triangulation. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 33, 253-258.
24.
TjadenP.ThoennesN. (2000). Extent, nature, and consequences of intimate partner violence: Findings from the National Violence Against Women survey. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
25.
ZhangY.WildemuthB. (2009). Qualitative analysis of content. In WildemuthB. (Ed.), Applications of social research methods to questions in information and library science (pp. 308-319). Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited.
