Close
New

Medscape is available in 5 Language Editions – Choose your Edition here.

 

Domestic Violence

  • Author: Lynn Barkley Burnett, MD, EdD; Chief Editor: Barry E Brenner, MD, PhD, FACEP  more...
 
Updated: Mar 30, 2016
 

Background

The medical literature defines domestic violence in different ways. In this article, domestic violence refers to the victimization of a person with whom the abuser has or has had an intimate, romantic, or spousal relationship. Domestic violence encompasses violence against both men and women and includes violence in gay and lesbian relationships.

Domestic violence consists of a pattern of coercive behaviors used by a competent adult or adolescent to establish and maintain power and control over another competent adult or adolescent. These behaviors, which can occur alone or in combination, sporadically or continually, include physical violence, psychological abuse, stalking, and nonconsensual sexual behavior. Each incident builds upon previous episodes, thus setting the stage for future violence.

  • Forms of physical violence include assault with weapons, pushing, shoving, slapping, punching, choking, kicking, holding, and binding. Two forms of physical violence have been posited: occasional outbursts of bidirectional violence (ie, mutual combat) and frank terrorism, of which the "patriarchal" form has been the most researched.
  • Psychological abuse includes threats of physical harm to the victim or others, intimidation, coercion, degradation and humiliation, false accusations, and ridicule.
  • Intimate partner stalking may occur during a relationship or after a relationship has ended. Of women who are stalked by an intimate partner, 81% are also physically assaulted. A new development is psychological abuse (generally threats) expressed through the Internet, so-called cyberstalking.
  • Sexual abuse may include nonconsensual or painful sexual acts (often unprotected against pregnancy or disease).

Domestic violence may be associated with physical or social isolation (eg, denying communication with friends or relatives, or making it so difficult that the victim stops attempting communication) and deprivation (eg, abandonment in dangerous places, refusing help when sick or injured, prohibiting access to money or other basic necessities).

Domestic violence is not a new epidemic—it spans history and cultures. The Common Law of England permitted a man to beat his wife, provided the diameter of the stick so used was not wider than the diameter of his thumb, hence, the term "Rule of Thumb."

Domestic violence exacts a multitude of costs. Annual economic costs (in 2003 dollars) was estimated at $8.3 billion, including $6.2 billion for physical assault, $461 million for stalking, $460 million for rape, and $1.2 billion for lives lost. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reports that victims of severe domestic violence annually miss 8 million days of paid work—the equivalent of 32,000 full-time jobs, and approximately 5.6 million days of household productivity.

The magnitude of the current problem may be further appreciated by examining the burden placed on law enforcement. Police in the United States spend approximately a third of their time responding to domestic violence calls. Of women presenting to the emergency department (ED), research suggests that between 4 and 15% are there because of problems related to domestic violence. Calls to the police and visits to the ED sometimes are used by victims of domestic violence to strategically manage the episode by de-escalating the violence.

When victims of domestic violence (male and female) were asked where they would go for assistance, they responded as follows:

  • Would seek help from the police - 31.2%
  • Did not know - 27.7%
  • Would go to a hospital - 14.7%
  • Would approach a family member - 10.7%
  • Would go to a shelter - 10.7%
  • Would forego assistance and simply retaliate - 3.1%

Women who are abused seek medical attention moreso than those who are not victimized. A study in the Northwest found that 95% of women with diagnosed domestic violence sought care 5 or more times per year and that 27% sought medical care more than 20 times per year. Often, these women go to the ED.

Victims of acute domestic violence are those patients in the ED whose complaints directly relate to an incident of abuse. Two to 4% of women who present for treatment of injuries, excluding those sustained in motor vehicle collisions (MVCs), are victims of domestic violence.

Of women in violent relationships, 77% who present to the ED do so for reasons other than trauma. The percentage of women with domestic violence–related symptoms who present to an ED with any complaint ranges from 22-35%, including patients requesting nontrauma, prenatal, or psychiatric care.

Abused patients who present for other medical problems resulting from a violent milieu are said to suffer from chronic domestic violence. This term applies to those patients who are victims of violence at the hands of a partner and who seek medical care for symptoms related, directly or indirectly, to the stress of the relationship.

Women report to the police only 20% of all rapes, 25% of all physical assaults, and 50% of all stalkings perpetrated by intimate partners. Even fewer men who are victims of such crimes at the hands of an intimate partner report them to law enforcement. Thus, the emergency clinician is often the first professional from whom an abused person seeks help. In fact, more than 85% of Americans indicated they could tell a physician if they had been a victim or perpetrator of family violence, slightly more than those who would tell their priest, pastor, or rabbi and considerably more than those who would tell a police officer.

Yet, if a request for help is not explicit, the opportunity to intervene in domestic violence often is not addressed. The following elements may deter interceding in domestic violence:

  • Social factors, such as implicit and explicit social norms, societal tolerance of violence, and desensitization through exposure
  • Personal factors, such as sex bias, personal history of abuse, idealized concepts of family life, concerns over privacy, and perceived powerlessness
  • Professional factors, such as time constraints, inadequate skills, professional detachment, and professional relationships with abusers or victims
  • Institutional and legal factors such as inadequate or unclear policies and fear of legal reprisal
  • Additional barriers including blaming the victim, disapproving of her or his decisions and circumstances, questioning patients in an inappropriate manner, and failing to query middle-class or affluent patients in the mistaken belief that such individuals are not victims of domestic violence

If the emergency clinician is to recognize occult domestic violence and correctly interpret its associated behavior, a high index of suspicion is necessary, and battering must be entertained in the differential diagnosis of a wide variety of presenting complaints. In this regard, much improvement is needed. An accurate diagnosis of battering is estimated in less than 1 of 25 women. Data from another study documented that 23% of women presented 6-10 times and another 20% sought medical attention on 11 occasions before a diagnosis of abuse finally was made.

Why would domestic violence consistently be unrecognized over so many ED visits? The most significant reason for missing the diagnosis of domestic violence simply may be failure to ask. Limiting inquiry about domestic violence to patients with specific complaints fails to identify many victims of abuse.

The largest ED-based study to date (n = 4501) discovered that 6 diagnoses were more common in women in physically abusive relationships compared with women not in such relationships. However, the low sensitivity and positive predictive value of these diagnoses made the findings clinically useless in detecting most women in violent relationships—those who do not present with injuries resulting from acute battering.

The US Preventive Services Task Force states that it cannot, at this time, determine the balance between the benefits and the harms of screening for family and intimate partner violence among children, women, and older adults. However, given the substantial percentage of patients seeking care in the ED who are abused by their partners, considering a context of violence in assessing all types of ED patients would seem prudent. Patients may be males or females from any socioeconomic group, and their injuries may or may not be related to trauma. Moreover, the incidence and prevalence of domestic violence, coupled with its morbidity and potential mortality, strongly militate in favor of routinely screening most adult or adolescent emergent patients.

Recognition of domestic violence and employment of appropriate management strategies may well have even broader implications. Domestic violence fits within a spectrum of family violence that also includes elder abuse, child sexual abuse, and child abuse and neglect.

These forms of violence share many similar root causes, thus interventions directed at one may positively influence other forms of violence as well.

The practitioner in the emergency department is on the front line of interpersonal violence and is thus in a unique and vital position to initiate the process that may stop the cycle of violence in all of its familial expressions.

Next

Pathophysiology

As with organic pathology, an archetypical abnormal behavioral function characterizes domestic violence. The term cycle of violence is descriptive of the pattern of abuse and consists of the following 3 components:

  • Tension building
  • Explosion, acute battering
  • Absence of tension, also called loving respite, reconciliation, or the "honeymoon phase"

An appreciation of the cycle of violence is essential to understanding the nature of domestic violence, its clinical presentation, and appropriate intervention.

During the tension-building phase, the battering victim frequently tries to be particularly compliant and kind in an attempt to avoid violence. Irrespective of any special efforts, the abuser still becomes angry with increasing frequency and intensity. Paradoxically, the abused person may be so frightened during this tension-building phase that she or he attempts to precipitate abuse, just to be done with the episode. When battering does occur, it frequently is followed by a period of indefinite length during which the batterer is contrite and demonstrates loving behavior.

Friends and family of victims, as well as experts, frequently ask victims of domestic violence why they stay in such apparently horrible situations. A nonexhaustive list of reasons includes love, hope, dependence, fear, and learned helplessness.

With reference to love, domestic violence often occurs in a relationship in which at least one partner loves the other. This partner wants things to be all right again and does not want to lose the other person's (perceived) love.

Hope is an operative corollary to love. The abused partner wants to believe the batterer's promises made during the increasingly frequent honeymoon periods of ever-decreasing duration as the cycle of violence deepens.

Dependence is an additional barrier to seeking help and most commonly is observed in women who may have a sense of emotional dependency with reluctance to expose batterers to punishment. In fact, few victims cooperate in the prosecution of arrested assailants. After only a few days, many victims even deny that they have been assaulted. Women are also more likely to rely on their partner for financial support. The abused person may feel there are no options but to stay and tolerate the violence, especially if children are involved.

Fear is a powerful factor. Victims repeatedly emphasize that seeking care or assisting in prosecution of their assailants would escalate the violence, and their fears are based in fact. Batterers often escalate violence when their partners increase help-seeking measures or attempt separation. During prosecution, approximately half of batterers threaten retaliatory violence, and more than 30% actually commit assaults.

The most dangerous time for battered women is during attempts to leave relationships. Women who are separated from their husbands have a risk of violence about 3 times more than that of divorced women and approximately 25 times more than that of married women. Up to 75% of domestic assaults reported to law enforcement agencies occur after separation of the couple, with women most likely to be murdered when reporting abuse or attempting to leave an abusive relationship.

Another fear experienced by victims of domestic violence is loss of children; batterers often retaliate by abducting offspring, especially during the early period of separation.

Finally, learned helplessness may be a factor. People exposed to unpredictable and inescapable negative stimuli may become passive and unable to protect their lives. A stress response syndrome has been described, which consists of self-blame, chronic anxiety, extreme passivity, denial of anger toward others while directing anger inwardly, and paralyzing terror at the first sign of danger.

Keeping the above factors in mind, attention now turns to the patient's willingness to accept help and take steps to extricate himself or herself from the environment of domestic violence. Recalling the cycle of violence previously addressed, the patient may be amenable to intervention during both the tension-building phase and the battering phase. During the reconciliation phase, the battered person typically is showered with expressions of love and apology and with assurances that the abuse will never happen again. Given the dynamics of this stage, the patient is much less willing to seek or receive help.

Insight into a further consideration of behavioral change is offered by the Transtheoretic Model of Change described by Proschaska and DiClemente. They posit a 5-stage dynamic model characterized by the following: Precontemplation, Contemplation, Preparation, Action, and Maintenance. Adapting this model to the setting of domestic violence, in Precontemplation, the patient may not recognize the abusive state (feeling he or she deserves such treatment or that such treatment is normal) and, therefore, has no thoughts of change; those unwilling or unable to make the requisite behavioral change are also placed in this stage.

Inquiry at this stage serves to raise awareness of the abnormal state.

In the Contemplation stage, which can last for years, the victim sees the problems created by the abuse and begins to think about the advantages and disadvantages of making a change. The Contemplation stage may begin with a nondisclosure phase, in which the patient is unwilling or unable to disclose the abusive relationship to others. This may be followed by a disclosure phase, when the patient is ready to discuss abuse with a clinician or other person. A study of patients who discussed abuse with a physician identified 4 expectations of significance: affirm the abuse is real, inform the patient about local resources for victims of domestic violence, educate patients about the effects of abuse on them and their children, and document injuries in the medical record.

The Preparation stage is marked by active planning for change, as manifested by telling family and friends of the abuse, calling hotlines, and making a plan for leaving. The Action stage speaks for itself and is frequently reached when violence is witnessed by or directed at children. This stage is reached when the victim makes the determination that the violence must end, and he or she assesses the presence of adequate support and resources. Maintenance involves solidifying the change and working to prevent relapse. Relapse is commonly seen as the patient moves through the stages of change and is most common in the action stage.

Previous
Next

Epidemiology

Frequency

United States

Lifetime and one-year estimates for intimate partner violence (IPV), sexual violence (SV), and stalking are alarmingly high for adult Americans, with IPV alone affecting more than 12 million people each year.[1]

Stalking statistics are also quite high; 6.6 million people are stalked in one year in the United States.[2] One in 6 women (15.2%) have been stalked during their lifetime, compared to 1 in 19 men (5.7%).[1] The majority of stalking victims are stalked by someone they know. Sixty-six percent of female victims and 41% of male victims of stalking are stalked by a current or former intimate partner.[2]

Nearly 5.3 million incidents of domestic violence occur annually among US women aged 18 years and older, with 3.2 million occurring among men. Of these incidents, most are relatively minor, such as pushing, grabbing, shoving, slapping, and hitting. Serious consequences certainly do, however, result.

Every year approximately 1.5 million intimate partner rapes and physical assaults are perpetrated against women, and approximately 800,000 are committed against men. Findings from the 2011 National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey indicate that nearly 1 in 5 women (19.3%) and 1 in 59 men (1.7%) have been raped in their lifetime.[1]

From 1994 to 2010, according to a 2012 special report from the US Department of Justice, the overall rate of IPV in the United States declined by 64%, from 9.8 victimizations per 1,000 persons age 12 or older to 3.6 per 1,000.[3] Females and males experienced similar overall declines in IPV during the same time period. From 2000 to 2005, the rate of IPV for females continued to decline (down 31%), while male victimization rates remained stable. This pattern differed between younger and older females, however. From 2000 to 2005, rates of IPV continued to decline for females ages 12 to 17 (down 52%), 18 to 24 (down 40%), and 25 to 34 (down 40%), while rates for females ages 35 to 49 and 50 or older remained stable.[3]

Mortality/Morbidity

Almost 2 million injuries occur each year as a result of domestic violence, of which approximately one third of patients will seek care in an ED. Reported injuries include 43,000 patients with gunshot wounds, stab wounds, fractures, internal injuries, and loss of consciousness; 53,000 injured as a result of intimate partner rape or sexual assault; and 390,000 with soft tissue trauma, such as contusions and cuts.

Over the past 20 years, the number of intimate partner homicides has decreased by about 14% overall for men and women.

In 2002, approximately 11% of homicide victims were killed by an intimate partner, accounting for 1,300 deaths.

In the United States, most intimate partner murders are committed with firearms, as is the case for murder in general.

Women were the victims in 76% of intimate partner murders in 2002. Of women murdered by an intimate partner, 44% had visited an ED within 2 years of the homicide, with 93% having had at least 1 visit for injury.

Four to 8% of women are abused at least once during pregnancy. A study in Maryland found that homicide was the leading cause of death among pregnant women in that state, whereas for nonpregnant women of child-bearing age, murder ranked as the fifth cause of death.

Nearly half of the estimated annual 4400 intrafamily murder victims are spouses. Fifty to 75% of the 1500 annual deaths resulting from murder-suicide occur in spousal or consortial relationships. More than 90% of such acts are perpetrated by the male partner, who often has a history of domestic violence. In these incidents, children and other family members may be murdered as well.

A home in which anyone has been hit or hurt in a family fight is 4.4 times more likely to be the scene of a homicide than is a violence-free home.

According to US Department of Justice data for 1998, women were the victims in 85% of nonlethal intimate violence.

The literature is contradictory as to the proportion of males and females who sustain injuries as a result of domestic violence. While the conventional wisdom is that women are more likely to be injured than are men, some reports suggest that the frequencies of male and female victims of domestic violence are equal.

In 1996, McCoy reported that, in mixed-sex domestic violence, the female is 13 times more likely to be injured than is the male.[4] In 1995, Bachman and Saltzman indicated that, in violent incidents committed by intimates, women sustained injury in 52% of cases, with 41% of those patients requiring medical care.[5]

Contrary findings come from a study of 516 patients presenting to an inner-city ED, in which high rates of domestic violence were nearly equal between men and women. Males and females had the following rates of domestic violence, respectively:

  • Past nonphysical violence - 14% versus 22%
  • Past physical violence - 28% versus 33%
  • Present nonphysical violence - 11% versus 15%
  • Present physical violence - 20% versus 19%

In an ED study of 1003 patients reported by Sachs et al, no significant sex difference was noted in the rate of patients acutely injured by intimate partner violence. No such difference was found in patients reporting abuse within the past year, abuse with a weapon, or abuse with a weapon within the last year.[6]

With reference to serious injury, in a small study (n = 37) reported by Vasquez and Falcone, victims of domestic violence admitted to one trauma center were just as likely to be male as female.[7] Males were more likely to be seriously injured than were females, with average Injury Severity Scores of 11.4 versus 6.9.

While males were less likely than females to be victims of gunshot wounds (6% vs 21%) or to be injured in an assault (22% vs 53%), they were more likely to be stabbed (72% vs 26%).[7]

Race

See the list below:

  • The National Violence Against Women Survey found that African American and American Indian and Alaskan Native women and men, and Hispanic women, report higher rates of domestic violence than do other minority groups; whereas Asian and Pacific Islander women and men tend to report lower rates of intimate partner violence than other minority groups. However, differences among minority groups diminish when other sociodemographic and relationship variables are controlled.
  • In 1998, Salber and Taliaferro reported that the spousal homicide rate among African Americans is 8.4 times more than for whites; however, the US Department of Justice reports that between 1976 and 1998, a 74% reduction occurred in the number of black men murdered by intimates.
  • The incidence of spousal homicide is 7.7 times higher in interracial marriages compared with intraracial marriages.

Sex

Much of the data concerning domestic violence are based on involvement of the criminal justice system. When interpreting reports from law enforcement agencies, the following caveat should be noted: In 1997, Ernst and colleagues reported a significant difference in reports of past abuse to the police, with 19% of women having made such reports versus only 6% of men.[8]

Females are more likely to be repeatedly attacked, injured, or raped by their male partners than by any other perpetrators. The US Department of Justice estimates that females are 6 times more likely than males to experience violence committed by an intimate (eg, spouse or ex-spouse, boyfriend or girlfriend, ex-boyfriend or ex-girlfriend). Of all violence against females that is committed by a lone offender, an intimate is the perpetrator in 29% of cases.

Half of homeless women and children are fleeing domestic violence.

Battered lesbians report high levels of sexual violence, in the range of 30-40%. Some experts believe that homosexual men also experience high levels of sexual violence, although little documentation can be found in the literature. Data from the National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs report the rate of domestic violence in same-sex couples increased by 29% in 2000.

Approximately 11% of women living with female intimate partners report being raped, physically assaulted, or stalked by their cohabitant. (In comparison, 30.4% of women living with a male partner, reported such victimization by their male cohabitant.)

Approximately 15% of men living with male intimate partners report being raped, physically assaulted, or stalked by their cohabitant. (In comparison, 7.7% of men who have lived with a female partner experienced such problems.)

Age

See the list below:

  • Women aged 16-24 years are more likely than other women to be victims of violence at the hands of an intimate. Twenty to 30% of university women report violence during a date.
  • The rates of spousal homicide for all groups peak in the 15- to 24-year-old age category. Rates decline with age in African Americans but not in whites.
  • As the age differential between husband and wife increases, so does the risk of spouse homicide.
Previous
 
 
Contributor Information and Disclosures
Author

Lynn Barkley Burnett, MD, EdD LLB(c), Medical Advisor, Fresno County Sheriff's Office; Attending Consultant-in-Chief and Chairman, Medical Ethics, Community Medical Centers; Adjunct Assistant Clinical Professor of Emergency Medicine and Forensic Pathology, Touro University College of Osteopathic Medicine, California; Core Graduate Adjunct Professor of Forensic Pathology, National University Master of Forensic Science Program; Core Graduate Adjunct Professor of Leadership in Healthcare, Health Law and Healthcare Ethics, Kaplan University Graduate School of Healthcare Administration

Lynn Barkley Burnett, MD, EdD is a member of the following medical societies: American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine, American Association for the Advancement of Science, American Association of Suicidology, American Cancer Society, American College of Sports Medicine, American Heart Association, American Public Health Association, American Society for Bioethics and Humanities, American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics, Association of Military Surgeons of the US, Christian Medical and Dental Associations, European Society of Cardiology, New York Academy of Sciences, Royal Society of Medicine, Society for Academic Emergency Medicine, Society of Critical Care Medicine, American Professional Society on the Abuse of Children, American Stroke Association, Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh, World Association for Disaster and Emergency Medicine, European Society of Intensive Care Medicine, European Society of Paediatric and Neonatal Intensive Care, European Society for Trauma and Emergency Surgery, International Homicide Investigators Association

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Coauthor(s)

Jonathan Adler, MD, MS Instructor, Department of Emergency Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Massachusetts General Hospital

Jonathan Adler, MD, MS is a member of the following medical societies: American Academy of Emergency Medicine, Society for Academic Emergency Medicine

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Specialty Editor Board

Francisco Talavera, PharmD, PhD Adjunct Assistant Professor, University of Nebraska Medical Center College of Pharmacy; Editor-in-Chief, Medscape Drug Reference

Disclosure: Received salary from Medscape for employment. for: Medscape.

Robert Harwood, MD, MPH, FACEP, FAAEM Senior Physcian, Department of Emergency Medicine, Advocate Christ Medical Center; Assistant Professor, Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Illinois at Chicago College of Medicine

Robert Harwood, MD, MPH, FACEP, FAAEM is a member of the following medical societies: American Academy of Emergency Medicine, Council of Emergency Medicine Residency Directors, American College of Emergency Physicians, American Medical Association, Phi Beta Kappa, Society for Academic Emergency Medicine

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Chief Editor

Barry E Brenner, MD, PhD, FACEP Professor of Emergency Medicine, Professor of Internal Medicine, Program Director for Emergency Medicine, Case Medical Center, University Hospitals, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine

Barry E Brenner, MD, PhD, FACEP is a member of the following medical societies: Alpha Omega Alpha, American Heart Association, American Thoracic Society, Arkansas Medical Society, New York Academy of Medicine, New York Academy of Sciences, Society for Academic Emergency Medicine, American Academy of Emergency Medicine, American College of Chest Physicians, American College of Emergency Physicians, American College of Physicians

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Additional Contributors

Steven A Conrad, MD, PhD Chief, Department of Emergency Medicine; Chief, Multidisciplinary Critical Care Service, Professor, Department of Emergency and Internal Medicine, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center

Steven A Conrad, MD, PhD is a member of the following medical societies: American College of Chest Physicians, American College of Critical Care Medicine, American College of Emergency Physicians, American College of Physicians, International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation, Louisiana State Medical Society, Shock Society, Society for Academic Emergency Medicine, Society of Critical Care Medicine

Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

References
  1. Breiding MJ, Smith SG, Basile KC, Walters ML, Chen J, Merrick MT. Prevalence and characteristics of sexual violence, stalking, and intimate partner violence victimization - national intimate partner and sexual violence survey, United States, 2011. MMWR Surveill Summ. 2014 Sep 5. 63 Suppl 8:1-18. [Medline].

  2. Black MC, Basile KC, Breiding MJ, Smith SG, Walters ML, Merrick MT, et al. The National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey (NISVS): 2010 Summary Report. CDC. Available at http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/nisvs_report2010-a.pdf. Accessed: October 7, 2014.

  3. U.S. Department of Justice - Office of Justice Programs. Special Report: Intimate Partner Violence, 1993–2010. November 2012. [Full Text].

  4. McCoy M. Domestic violence: clues to victimization. Ann Emerg Med. 1996 Jun. 27(6):764-5. [Medline].

  5. Bachman R, Saltzman LE. Violence against women: Estimates from the redesigned survey August 1995. NCJ-154348 Special Report. US Department of Justice:[Full Text].

  6. Sachs CJ, Baraff LJ, Peek C. Need for law enforcement in cases of intimate partner violence in a university ED. Am J Emerg Med. 1998 Jan. 16(1):60-3. [Medline].

  7. Vasquez D, Falcone RE. Cross-gender violence. Ann Emerg Med. 1997 Mar. 29(3):427-8. [Medline].

  8. Ernst AA, Nick TG, Weiss SJ, et al. Domestic violence in an inner-city ED. Ann Emerg Med. 1997 Aug. 30(2):190-7. [Medline].

  9. Feder G, Davies RA, Baird K, Dunne D, Eldridge S, Griffiths C, et al. Identification and Referral to Improve Safety (IRIS) of women experiencing domestic violence with a primary care training and support programme: a cluster randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2011 Nov 19. 378(9805):1788-95. [Medline].

  10. Hugl-Wajek JA, Cairo D, Shah S, McCreary B. Detection of domestic violence by a domestic violence advocate in the ED. J Emerg Med. 2012 Nov. 43(5):860-5. [Medline].

  11. Sebastian SJ. Domestic violence. Harwood-Nuss AL, ed. The Clinical Practice of Emergency Medicine. 2nd ed. Lippincott-Raven Publishers; 1996.

  12. Ahmad F, Hogg-Johnson S, Stewart DE, Skinner HA, Glazier RH, Levinson W. Computer-assisted screening for intimate partner violence and control: a randomized trial. Ann Intern Med. 2009 Jul 21. 151(2):93-102. [Medline].

  13. Heilig S, Rodriguez M, Martin S, Louie D, eds. Domestic violence: A practical approach for clinicians. San Francisco Medical Society; 1995. [Full Text].

  14. Strack GB, McLane G. How to improve your investigation and prosecution of strangulation cases. Presented at Family Prevention National Health/Domestic Violence Conf. 2000.

  15. Siemieniuk RA, Krentz HB, Gish JA, Gill MJ. Domestic violence screening: prevalence and outcomes in a Canadian HIV population. AIDS Patient Care STDS. 2010 Dec. 24(12):763-70. [Medline].

  16. Sareen J, Pagura J, Grant B. Is intimate partner violence associated with HIV infection among women in the United States?. Gen Hosp Psychiatry. 2009 May-Jun. 31(3):274-8. [Medline].

  17. Feder G, Wathen CN, MacMillan HL. An evidence-based response to intimate partner violence: WHO guidelines. JAMA. 2013 Aug 7. 310(5):479-80. [Medline].

  18. Brookoff D, O'Brien KK, Cook CS, et al. Characteristics of participants in domestic violence. Assessment at the scene of domestic assault. JAMA. 1997 May 7. 277(17):1369-73. [Medline].

  19. Ross DS. Adult abuse. Rosen P, ed. Emergency Medicine Concepts and Clinical Practice. 3rd ed. Mosby-Year Book; 1992.

  20. Abbott J. Injuries and illnesses of domestic violence. Ann Emerg Med. 1997 Jun. 29(6):781-5. [Medline].

  21. Alpert EJ, Sege RD, Bradshaw YS. Interpersonal violence and the education of physicians. Acad Med. 1997 Jan. 72(1 Suppl):S41-50. [Medline].

  22. Anderson RJ, Taliaferro EH. Injury prevention and control. J Emerg Med. 1998 May-Jun. 16(3):489-98. [Medline].

  23. Barkin RM. Pediatrics. A potpourri of clinical pearls. Emerg Med Clin North Am. 1997 May. 15(2):381-8. [Medline].

  24. Boergerhoff LA, Gerberich SG, Anderson A, et al. Out-of-hospital violence injury surveillance: quality of data collection. Ann Emerg Med. 1999 Dec. 34(6):745-50. [Medline].

  25. Bonds DE, Ellis SD, Weeks E, Palla SL, Lichstein P. A practice-centered intervention to increase screening for domestic violence in primary care practices. BMC Fam Pract. 2006. 7:63. [Medline].

  26. Bostock DJ, Brewster AL. Intimate partner sexual violence. Clinics in Family Practice. 2003 Mar. 5 (1):145.

  27. Cantu M, Coppola M, Lindner AJ. Evaluation and management of the sexually assaulted woman. Emerg Med Clin North Am. 2003 Aug. 21(3):737-50. [Medline].

  28. Condon L. Tracking violence at home (domestic violence involving same-sex couples). The Advocate. 2001 Sept 11.

  29. Corrigan JD, Wolfe M, Mysiw WJ, et al. Early identification of mild traumatic brain injury in female victims of domestic violence. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2003 May. 188(5 Suppl):S71-6. [Medline].

  30. Cross M. Why looking for victims of domestic violence makes sense. Manag Care. 2003 May. 12(5):27-30. [Medline].

  31. Director TD, Linden JA. Domestic violence: an approach to identification and intervention. Emerg Med Clin North Am. 2004 Nov. 22(4):1117-32. [Medline].

  32. Duxbury F. Recognising domestic violence in clinical practice using the diagnoses of posttraumatic stress disorder, depression and low self-esteem. Br J Gen Pract. 2006 Apr. 56(525):294-300. [Medline].

  33. Easley M. Domestic violence. Ann Emerg Med. 1996 Jun. 27(6):762-3. [Medline].

  34. Fact Sheet: Intimate Partner Violence. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2006. Available at http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/factsheets/ipvfacts.htm.

  35. Feldhaus KM, Koziol-McLain J, Amsbury HL, et al. Accuracy of 3 brief screening questions for detecting partner violence in the emergency department. JAMA. 1997 May 7. 277(17):1357-61. [Medline].

  36. Flitcraft A. Learning from the paradoxes of domestic violence. JAMA. 1997 May 7. 277(17):1400-1. [Medline].

  37. Furbee PM, Sikora R, Williams JM, et al. Comparison of domestic violence screening methods: a pilot study. Ann Emerg Med. 1998 Apr. 31(4):495-501. [Medline].

  38. Gazmararian JA, Lazorick S, Spitz AM, et al. Prevalence of violence against pregnant women. JAMA. 1996 Jun 26. 275(24):1915-20. [Medline].

  39. Greenfeld LA, Henneberg MA. Victim and offender self-reports of alcohol involvement in crime. Alcohol Res Health. 2001. 25(1):20-31. [Medline].

  40. Gremillion DH, Kanof EP. Overcoming barriers to physician involvement in identifying and referring victims of domestic violence. Ann Emerg Med. 1996 Jun. 27(6):769-73. [Medline].

  41. Gribbin A. Murder biggest cause of death in pregnancy. The Washington Times. March 21, 2001.

  42. Horon IL, Cheng D. Enhanced surveillance for pregnancy-associated mortality--Maryland, 1993-1998. JAMA. 2001 Mar 21. 285(11):1455-9. [Medline].

  43. Houry D, Feldhaus K, Thorson AC, et al. Mandatory reporting laws do not deter patients from seeking medical care. Ann Emerg Med. 1999 Sep. 34(3):336-41. [Medline].

  44. Houry D, Feldhaus KM, Nyquist SR, et al. Emergency department documentation in cases of intentional assault. Ann Emerg Med. 1999 Dec. 34(6):715-9. [Medline].

  45. Hyman A, Schillinger D, Lo B. Laws mandating reporting of domestic violence. Do they promote patient well-being?. JAMA. 1995 Jun 14. 273(22):1781-7. [Medline].

  46. Iavicoli LG. Mandatory reporting of domestic violence: the law, friend or foe?. Mt Sinai J Med. 2005 Jul. 72(4):228-31. [Medline].

  47. Kaufmann MC. Decreasing the burden of trauma for victims of violence. Ann Emerg Med. 1997 Aug. 30(2):199-203. [Medline].

  48. Kernsmith P. Exerting power or striking back: a gendered comparison of motivations for domestic violence perpetration. Violence Vict. 2005 Apr. 20(2):173-85. [Medline].

  49. Kyriacou DN, McCabe F, Anglin D, et al. Emergency department-based study of risk factors for acute injury from domestic violence against women. Ann Emerg Med. 1998 Apr. 31(4):502-6. [Medline].

  50. Landis JM, Sorenson SB. Victims of violence: the role and training of EMS personnel. Ann Emerg Med. 1997 Aug. 30(2):204-6. [Medline].

  51. Marwick C. Domestic violence recognized as world problem. JAMA. 1998 May 20. 279(19):1510. [Medline].

  52. McAfee RE. Physicians and domestic violence. Can we make a difference?. JAMA. 1995 Jun 14. 273(22):1790-1. [Medline].

  53. McCauley J, Kern DE, Kolodner K, et al. Clinical characteristics of women with a history of childhood abuse: unhealed wounds. JAMA. 1997 May 7. 277(17):1362-8. [Medline].

  54. McLeer SV, Anwar RAH. The abused, assaulted adult. Schwartz GR, ed. Principles and Practice of Emergency Medicine. 2nd ed. Lea & Febiger; 1992.

  55. Muelleman RL, Burgess P. Male victims of domestic violence and their history of perpetrating violence. Acad Emerg Med. 1998 Sep. 5(9):866-70. [Medline].

  56. Muelleman RL, Lenaghan PA, Pakieser RA. Battered women: injury locations and types. Ann Emerg Med. 1996 Nov. 28(5):486-92. [Medline].

  57. Muelleman RL, Lenaghan PA, Pakieser RA. Nonbattering presentations to the ED of women in physically abusive relationships. Am J Emerg Med. 1998 Mar. 16(2):128-31. [Medline].

  58. Muelleman RL, Reuwer J, Sanson TG, et al. An emergency medicine approach to violence throughout the life cycle. SAEM Public Health and Education Committee. Acad Emerg Med. 1996 Jul. 3(7):708-15. [Medline].

  59. Neufeld B. SAFE questions: overcoming barriers to the detection of domestic violence. Am Fam Physician. 1996 Jun. 53(8):2575-80, 2582. [Medline].

  60. Phelan MB, Hamberger LK, Guse CE, et al. Domestic violence among male and female patients seeking emergency medical services. Violence Vict. 2005 Apr. 20(2):187-206. [Medline].

  61. Ponsell MR. Assessing facial fractures in the emergency department. JAAPA. 2003 May. 16(5):43-4, 47-50, 69. [Medline].

  62. Rivara FP, Mueller BA, Somes G, et al. Alcohol and illicit drug abuse and the risk of violent death in the home. JAMA. 1997 Aug 20. 278(7):569-75. [Medline].

  63. Sachs CJ, Peek C, Baraff LJ, et al. Failure of the mandatory domestic violence reporting law to increase medical facility referral to police. Ann Emerg Med. 1998 Apr. 31(4):488-94. [Medline].

  64. Salber PR, Taliaferro E. Domestic violence. Rosen P, ed. Emergency Medicine Concepts and Clinical Practice. 4th ed. Mosby-Year Book; 1998.

  65. Salber PR, Taliaferro E. Domestic violence. Tintinalli JE, ed. Emergency Medicine: A Comprehensive Study Guide. 4th ed. McGraw-Hill; 1996.

  66. Salber PR, Taliaferro E. Intimate partner violence and abuse. Rosen, ed. Emergency Medicine: Concepts and Clinical Practice. 5th ed. St Louis, MO: Mosby; 2002.

  67. Salber PR, Taliaferro E. Men and domestic violence. Acad Emerg Med. 1998 Sep. 5(9):849-50. [Medline].

  68. Science News. Childhood trauma raises risk of heart disease. Science News. 2004 Nov 30.

  69. Shkrum MJ, Ramsay DA. Forensic Pathology of Trauma. Totowa NJ: Humana Press; 2007.

  70. Smock WS. Forensic emergency medicine. Rosen P, ed. Emergency Medicine Concepts and Clinical Practice. 5th ed. St Louis, MO: Mosby; 2002.

  71. Spitz WU, ed. Medicolegal Investigation of Death. 4th ed. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Fisher Publisher; 2006.

  72. Tjaden P, Thoennes N. Extent, nature, and consequences of intimate partner violence. Findings from the National Violence Against Women Survey. July 2000. NJC 181867:

  73. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for family and intimate partner violence: recommendation statement. Ann Fam Med. 2004 Mar-Apr. 2(2):156-60. [Medline].

  74. Wahl RA, Sisk DJ, Ball TM. Clinic-based screening for domestic violence: use of a child safety questionnaire. BMC Med. 2004 Jun 30. 2:25. [Medline].

  75. Waller AE, Hohenhaus SM, Shah PJ, et al. Development and validation of an emergency department screening and referral protocol for victims of domestic violence. Ann Emerg Med. 1996 Jun. 27(6):754-60. [Medline].

  76. Wattendorf G. Expert testimony and risk assessment in stalking cases: the FBI's NCAVC as a resource. The FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin. Federal Bureau of Investigation, National Center for the Analysis of Violent Crime. Nov 1, 2004.

  77. Ziegler MF, Greenwald MH, DeGuzman MA, et al. Posttraumatic stress responses in children: awareness and practice among a sample of pediatric emergency care providers. Pediatrics. 2005 May. 115(5):1261-7. [Medline].

  78. Zink T, Elder N, Jacobson J, et al. Medical management of intimate partner violence considering the stages of change: precontemplation and contemplation. Ann Fam Med. 2004 May-Jun. 2(3):231-9. [Medline].

 
Previous
Next
 
 
 
 
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2016 by WebMD LLC. This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.