Implementation of a Family Planning Clinic-Based Partner Violence and Reproductive Coercion Intervention: Provider and Patient Perspectives

Elizabeth Miller, Heather L. Mccauley, Michele R. Decker, Rebecca Levenson, Sarah Zelazny, Kelley A. Jones, Heather Anderson, Jay G. Silverman

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

8 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

CONTEXT: Despite multiple calls for clinic-based services to identify and support women victimized by partner violence, screening remains uncommon in family planning clinics. Furthermore, traditional screening, based on disclosure of violence, may miss women who fear reporting their experiences. Strategies that are sensitive to the signs, symptoms and impact of trauma require exploration. METHODS: In 2011, as part of a cluster randomized controlled trial, staff at 11 Pennsylvania family planning clinics were trained to offer a trauma-informed intervention addressing intimate partner violence and reproductive coercion to all women seeking care, regardless of exposure to violence. The intervention sought to educate women about available resources and harm reduction strategies. In 2013, at the conclusion of the trial, 18 providers, five administrators and 49 patients completed semistructured interviews exploring acceptability of the intervention and barriers to implementation. Consensus and open coding strategies were used to analyze the data. RESULTS: Providers reported that the intervention increased their confidence in discussing intimate partner violence and reproductive coercion. They noted that asking patients to share the educational information with other women facilitated the conversation. Barriers to implementation included lack of time and not having routine reminders to offer the intervention. Patients described how receiving the intervention gave them important information, made them feel supported and less isolated, and empowered them to help others. CONCLUSIONS: A universal intervention may be acceptable to providers and patients. However, successful implementation in family planning settings may require attention to system-level factors that providers view as barriers.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalPerspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - 2017
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Coercion
Family Planning Services
Violence
family planning
violence
Harm Reduction
trauma
Wounds and Injuries
Disclosure
Administrative Personnel
Signs and Symptoms
Fear
Consensus
Randomized Controlled Trials
Interviews
coding
conversation
confidence
anxiety
staff

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Sociology and Political Science
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology
  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Cite this

Implementation of a Family Planning Clinic-Based Partner Violence and Reproductive Coercion Intervention : Provider and Patient Perspectives. / Miller, Elizabeth; Mccauley, Heather L.; Decker, Michele R.; Levenson, Rebecca; Zelazny, Sarah; Jones, Kelley A.; Anderson, Heather; Silverman, Jay G.

In: Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 2017.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Miller, Elizabeth ; Mccauley, Heather L. ; Decker, Michele R. ; Levenson, Rebecca ; Zelazny, Sarah ; Jones, Kelley A. ; Anderson, Heather ; Silverman, Jay G. / Implementation of a Family Planning Clinic-Based Partner Violence and Reproductive Coercion Intervention : Provider and Patient Perspectives. In: Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health. 2017.
@article{df6bcde84cdc4d2781c71a147a562064,
title = "Implementation of a Family Planning Clinic-Based Partner Violence and Reproductive Coercion Intervention: Provider and Patient Perspectives",
abstract = "CONTEXT: Despite multiple calls for clinic-based services to identify and support women victimized by partner violence, screening remains uncommon in family planning clinics. Furthermore, traditional screening, based on disclosure of violence, may miss women who fear reporting their experiences. Strategies that are sensitive to the signs, symptoms and impact of trauma require exploration. METHODS: In 2011, as part of a cluster randomized controlled trial, staff at 11 Pennsylvania family planning clinics were trained to offer a trauma-informed intervention addressing intimate partner violence and reproductive coercion to all women seeking care, regardless of exposure to violence. The intervention sought to educate women about available resources and harm reduction strategies. In 2013, at the conclusion of the trial, 18 providers, five administrators and 49 patients completed semistructured interviews exploring acceptability of the intervention and barriers to implementation. Consensus and open coding strategies were used to analyze the data. RESULTS: Providers reported that the intervention increased their confidence in discussing intimate partner violence and reproductive coercion. They noted that asking patients to share the educational information with other women facilitated the conversation. Barriers to implementation included lack of time and not having routine reminders to offer the intervention. Patients described how receiving the intervention gave them important information, made them feel supported and less isolated, and empowered them to help others. CONCLUSIONS: A universal intervention may be acceptable to providers and patients. However, successful implementation in family planning settings may require attention to system-level factors that providers view as barriers.",
author = "Elizabeth Miller and Mccauley, {Heather L.} and Decker, {Michele R.} and Rebecca Levenson and Sarah Zelazny and Jones, {Kelley A.} and Heather Anderson and Silverman, {Jay G.}",
year = "2017",
doi = "10.1363/psrh.12021",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health",
issn = "1538-6341",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Implementation of a Family Planning Clinic-Based Partner Violence and Reproductive Coercion Intervention

T2 - Provider and Patient Perspectives

AU - Miller, Elizabeth

AU - Mccauley, Heather L.

AU - Decker, Michele R.

AU - Levenson, Rebecca

AU - Zelazny, Sarah

AU - Jones, Kelley A.

AU - Anderson, Heather

AU - Silverman, Jay G.

PY - 2017

Y1 - 2017

N2 - CONTEXT: Despite multiple calls for clinic-based services to identify and support women victimized by partner violence, screening remains uncommon in family planning clinics. Furthermore, traditional screening, based on disclosure of violence, may miss women who fear reporting their experiences. Strategies that are sensitive to the signs, symptoms and impact of trauma require exploration. METHODS: In 2011, as part of a cluster randomized controlled trial, staff at 11 Pennsylvania family planning clinics were trained to offer a trauma-informed intervention addressing intimate partner violence and reproductive coercion to all women seeking care, regardless of exposure to violence. The intervention sought to educate women about available resources and harm reduction strategies. In 2013, at the conclusion of the trial, 18 providers, five administrators and 49 patients completed semistructured interviews exploring acceptability of the intervention and barriers to implementation. Consensus and open coding strategies were used to analyze the data. RESULTS: Providers reported that the intervention increased their confidence in discussing intimate partner violence and reproductive coercion. They noted that asking patients to share the educational information with other women facilitated the conversation. Barriers to implementation included lack of time and not having routine reminders to offer the intervention. Patients described how receiving the intervention gave them important information, made them feel supported and less isolated, and empowered them to help others. CONCLUSIONS: A universal intervention may be acceptable to providers and patients. However, successful implementation in family planning settings may require attention to system-level factors that providers view as barriers.

AB - CONTEXT: Despite multiple calls for clinic-based services to identify and support women victimized by partner violence, screening remains uncommon in family planning clinics. Furthermore, traditional screening, based on disclosure of violence, may miss women who fear reporting their experiences. Strategies that are sensitive to the signs, symptoms and impact of trauma require exploration. METHODS: In 2011, as part of a cluster randomized controlled trial, staff at 11 Pennsylvania family planning clinics were trained to offer a trauma-informed intervention addressing intimate partner violence and reproductive coercion to all women seeking care, regardless of exposure to violence. The intervention sought to educate women about available resources and harm reduction strategies. In 2013, at the conclusion of the trial, 18 providers, five administrators and 49 patients completed semistructured interviews exploring acceptability of the intervention and barriers to implementation. Consensus and open coding strategies were used to analyze the data. RESULTS: Providers reported that the intervention increased their confidence in discussing intimate partner violence and reproductive coercion. They noted that asking patients to share the educational information with other women facilitated the conversation. Barriers to implementation included lack of time and not having routine reminders to offer the intervention. Patients described how receiving the intervention gave them important information, made them feel supported and less isolated, and empowered them to help others. CONCLUSIONS: A universal intervention may be acceptable to providers and patients. However, successful implementation in family planning settings may require attention to system-level factors that providers view as barriers.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85014671067&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85014671067&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1363/psrh.12021

DO - 10.1363/psrh.12021

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85014671067

JO - Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health

JF - Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health

SN - 1538-6341

ER -