Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine · 2020
Boston Violence Intervention Advocacy Program: Challenges and Opportunities for Client Engagement and Goal Achievement.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Pino Elizabeth C, Fontin Francesca, James Thea L, Dugan Elizabeth
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: A better understanding of the factors affecting client engagement in hospital-based violence intervention programs (HVIPs), and which types of client needs prove most challenging to achieve, may be of key importance in developing novel, targeted strategies to violence intervention. In this study, we examined the demographics and injury characteristics of violently injured patients by their level of engagement with the Boston Violence Intervention Advocacy Program (VIAP) and determined the degree of client goal achievement through VIAP client services.
METHODS: This retrospective study was performed using a cohort of patients presenting to the Boston Medical Center emergency department for a violent penetrating injury due to community violence between 2013 and 2018. Data on client demographics, injury characteristics, and client needs were collected from the VIAP data repository. Cox proportional hazard regression models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals to assess the difference in hazards of client goal achievement by need type.
RESULTS: Of the 2,243 victims of violent injury, 839 (37.4%) patients engaged with VIAP. Significant predictors of client engagement include younger age, Black race, permanent home, existing mental health diagnosis, gunshot wound, and more severe injuries. Conversely, older age, homelessness, substance use, stab wound, and less severe injuries predicted refusal of VIAP services. For clients who chose to engage with VIAP, needs related to education (HR = 0.47, 95% CI = 0.38 to 0.58), employment (HR = 0.66, 95% CI = 0.57 to 0.77), and housing (HR = 0.76, 95% CI = 0.68 to 0.86) were significantly less likely to be achieved compared to basic needs.
CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that VIAP is effectively engaging the client population that HVIPs have been designed to support. HVIPs should consider novel strategies to engage vulnerable populations not typically targeted by intervention programs. These results speak to the difficulties of program attrition and the complexities of altering the life course for victims of violence.
METHODS: This retrospective study was performed using a cohort of patients presenting to the Boston Medical Center emergency department for a violent penetrating injury due to community violence between 2013 and 2018. Data on client demographics, injury characteristics, and client needs were collected from the VIAP data repository. Cox proportional hazard regression models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals to assess the difference in hazards of client goal achievement by need type.
RESULTS: Of the 2,243 victims of violent injury, 839 (37.4%) patients engaged with VIAP. Significant predictors of client engagement include younger age, Black race, permanent home, existing mental health diagnosis, gunshot wound, and more severe injuries. Conversely, older age, homelessness, substance use, stab wound, and less severe injuries predicted refusal of VIAP services. For clients who chose to engage with VIAP, needs related to education (HR = 0.47, 95% CI = 0.38 to 0.58), employment (HR = 0.66, 95% CI = 0.57 to 0.77), and housing (HR = 0.76, 95% CI = 0.68 to 0.86) were significantly less likely to be achieved compared to basic needs.
CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that VIAP is effectively engaging the client population that HVIPs have been designed to support. HVIPs should consider novel strategies to engage vulnerable populations not typically targeted by intervention programs. These results speak to the difficulties of program attrition and the complexities of altering the life course for victims of violence.