Intimate partner violence screening in a pregnant military population: Implementation of the E-HITS protocol
APA Citation:
Gregg, R. W., Teneyuque, N., & Griffis, J. (2024). Intimate partner violence screening in a pregnant military population: Implementation of the E-HITS protocol. Obstetrics & Gynecology, 143(5S), 53S. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.AOG.0001013684.20299.27
Focus:
Trauma
Couples
Branch of Service:
Multiple branches
Military Affiliation:
Active Duty
Subject Affiliation:
Active duty service member
Spouse of service member or veteran
Military families
Population:
Adulthood (18 yrs & older)
Young adulthood (18 - 29 yrs)
Thirties (30 - 39 yrs)
Middle age (40 - 64 yrs)
Methodology:
Quantitative Study
Authors:
Gregg, Rebecca W., Teneyuque, Nicholas, Griffis, Jeffrey
Abstract:
INTRODUCTION: The military population has higher rates of intimate partner violence (IPV) compared to the civilian population. This is further exacerbated in obstetrics patients, with an estimated rate of 4–29% of pregnant women affected. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and 2018 Department of Defense Clinical Practice Guidelines for Management of Pregnancy recommend routine screening for IPV at obstetric visits, although a preferred screening modality has not been identified. METHODS: The prevalence of IPV in pregnancy before and after implementation of the validated Extended-Hurt, Insult, Threaten, Scream (E-HITS) questionnaire at a single military treatment facility was compared. Retrospective chart review was conducted between January and December 2019 of patients who had been screened using a single question (“Do you feel safe at home?”). E-HITS was implemented in the obstetrics clinic in February 2022, and data were collected prospectively for 12 months. The difference between the two IPV screening modalities was analyzed using Fisher’s exact test. RESULTS: A total of 1,627 IPV screenings were reviewed. Of the 783 IPV screenings using the single question, there were 2 positive screens (0.26%). Using greater than 7 as the positive screening cutoff, there were 24 positives (2.84%) out of the 844 E-HITS screenings. Using greater than 6 as the cutoff for E-HITS, there were 54 positive screens (6.4%). There was a statistically significant difference in the detection rate between the two modalities at both cutoff levels (P<.0001). CONCLUSION: E-HITS is a more sensitive screening tool for IPV in this population, more closely mirroring previously published rates.
Publication Type:
Article
Keywords:
intimate partner violence, pregnant military population, E-HITS protocol