Trauma surgery & acute care open · 2016
Hospital-based violence intervention programs targeting adult populations: an Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma evidence-based review.
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.
Affinati Steven, Patton Desmond, Hansen Luke, Ranney Megan, Christmas A Britton, Violano Pina, Sodhi Aparna, Robinson Bryce, Crandall Marie, from the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma Injury Control and Violence Prevention Section and Guidelines Section
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Violent injury and reinjury take a devastating toll on distressed communities. Many trauma centers have created hospital-based violent injury prevention programs (HVIP) to address psychosocial, educational, and mental health needs of injured patients that may contribute to reinjury.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the overall effectiveness of HVIPs for violent injury prevention. We performed an evidence-based review to answer the following population, intervention, comparator, outcomes (PICO) question: Are HVIPs attending to adult patients (age 18+) treated for intentional injury more effective than the usual care at preventing: intentional violent reinjury and/or death; arrest and/or incarceration; substance abuse and/or mental issues; job and/or school attainment?
DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and the Cochrane Library were queried for salient articles by a professional librarian on two separate occasions, and related articles were identified from references.
STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA PARTICIPANTS INTERVENTIONS: Eligible studies examined adult patients treated for intentional injury in a hospital-based violence prevention program compared to a control group.
STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS: We used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology to assess the breadth and quality of the evidence.
RESULTS: 71 articles were identified. After discarding duplicates, reviews, and those articles that did not address our PICO questions, we ultimately reviewed 10 articles. We found insufficient evidence to recommend adult-focused HVIP interventions.
LIMITATIONS: There was a relative paucity of data, and available studies were limited by self-selection bias and small sample sizes.
CONCLUSIONS: We make no recommendation with respect to adult-focused HVIP interventions.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the overall effectiveness of HVIPs for violent injury prevention. We performed an evidence-based review to answer the following population, intervention, comparator, outcomes (PICO) question: Are HVIPs attending to adult patients (age 18+) treated for intentional injury more effective than the usual care at preventing: intentional violent reinjury and/or death; arrest and/or incarceration; substance abuse and/or mental issues; job and/or school attainment?
DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and the Cochrane Library were queried for salient articles by a professional librarian on two separate occasions, and related articles were identified from references.
STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA PARTICIPANTS INTERVENTIONS: Eligible studies examined adult patients treated for intentional injury in a hospital-based violence prevention program compared to a control group.
STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS: We used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology to assess the breadth and quality of the evidence.
RESULTS: 71 articles were identified. After discarding duplicates, reviews, and those articles that did not address our PICO questions, we ultimately reviewed 10 articles. We found insufficient evidence to recommend adult-focused HVIP interventions.
LIMITATIONS: There was a relative paucity of data, and available studies were limited by self-selection bias and small sample sizes.
CONCLUSIONS: We make no recommendation with respect to adult-focused HVIP interventions.