Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a serious public health problem leading many health care organizations to recommend universal screening as part of standard health care practice. Prior work shows that most IPV victims and perpetrators are unidentified by health care staff. We sought to enhance the capacity of an urban trauma center to identify IPV using a dual-method screening tool, and to establish prevalence of IPV victimization and perpetration among this population. METHODS:Patients aged 18 and older were recruited from a Level 1 trauma center from May 2015 to July 2017. Participants were assessed for IPV using a touch-screen tablet and then via face-to-face assessment. The data were used to determine feasibility of this dual method and to establish prevalence of IPV in this sample. RESULTS:Of 586 eligible patients, 250 were successfully recruited for the study (43% response rate). Using the subscales of physical abuse, severe psychological abuse, and sexual coercion from the tablet-based Conflict Tactics Scale 2, 40% of women and 34% of men met criteria for IPV exposure in the past year and 35.6% of men and 50.6% of women met criteria using the face-to-face screen. In total, 102 patients (40.8%) screened positive using the dual method. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:This study reports on a dual method to improve screening and identification of IPV in a Level 1 trauma center. Ultimately, the dual screening method identified more victims than either method on its own. Our findings provide evidence to standardize universal screening in our trauma center. Moving forward, we will link screening results to medical record data to identify predictors of patients' current experiences of psychological and physical IPV. Our ultimate goal is to use these predictors to build a model for identifying patients who are at high risk for IPV victimization or perpetration. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:Epidemiologic study, level III.

The aim of this study was to describe the management of severe blunt renal injuries at a Level I trauma hospital. Data were collected through a record review of patients admitted from January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2011. These data were compiled as part of our hospital's participation in the Nonoperative Management of Grade IV and V Blunt Renal Injuries: A Research Consortium of New England Centers for Trauma Study. Thirty-six patients with severe blunt renal injuries were identified. Twenty-nine (80.6%) underwent nonoperative management (NOM) for their injuries. Seven (19.4%) received an immediate operation because of hemodynamic instability or CT findings of large hemoperitoneum or extravasation. No significant differences were observed on Injury Severity Score, Glasgow Coma Scale, injury grade, or systolic blood pressure on arrival to the emergency department. On arrival, the operative patients had higher heart rates and lower hematocrit and hemoglobin values relative to the NOM patients. The kidney was salvaged in three of the seven operative patients and was either saved or partially saved in all except one NOM patient. Three NOM patients died; none because of renal injuries. All other patients were successfully managed. None of the operative patients died. NOM management of high-grade renal injury was successful for these patients and should be considered in the management of grade IV and V blunt renal trauma.

Traumatic retroperitoneal injuries constitute a challenge for trauma surgeons. They usually occur in the context of a trauma patient with multiple associated injuries, in whom invasive procedures have an important role in the diagnosis of these injuries. The retroperitoneum is the anatomical region with the highest mortality rates, therefore early diagnosis and treatment of these lesions acquire special relevance. The aim of this study is to present current published scientific evidence regarding incidence, mechanism of injury, diagnostic methods and treatment through a review of the international literature from the last 70 years. In conclusion, this systematic review showed an increasing trend towards non-surgical management of retroperitoneal injuries.

BACKGROUND:In the past decade, more than 300,000 people in the United States have died from firearm injuries. Our goal was to assess the effectiveness of two particular prevention strategies, restrictive licensing of firearms and concealed carry laws, on firearm-related injuries in the US Restrictive Licensing was defined to include denials of ownership for various offenses, such as performing background checks for domestic violence and felony convictions. Concealed carry laws allow licensed individuals to carry concealed weapons. METHODS:A comprehensive review of the literature was performed. We used Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation methodology to assess the breadth and quality of the data specific to our Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcomes (PICO) questions. RESULTS:A total of 4673 studies were initially identified, then seven more added after two subsequent, additional literature reviews. Of these, 3,623 remained after removing duplicates; 225 case reports, case series, and reviews were excluded, and 3,379 studies were removed because they did not focus on prevention or did not address our comparators of interest. This left a total of 14 studies which merited inclusion for PICO 1 and 13 studies which merited inclusion for PICO 2. CONCLUSION:PICO 1: We recommend the use of restrictive licensing to reduce firearm-related injuries.PICO 2: We recommend against the use of concealed carry laws to reduce firearm-related injuries.This committee found an association between more restrictive licensing and lower firearm injury rates. All 14 studies were population-based, longitudinal, used modeling to control for covariates, and 11 of the 14 were multi-state. Twelve of the studies reported reductions in firearm injuries, from 7% to 40%. We found no consistent effect of concealed carry laws. Of note, the varied quality of the available data demonstrates a significant information gap, and this committee recommends that we as a society foster a nurturing and encouraging environment that can strengthen future evidence based guidelines. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:Systematic review, level III.

BACKGROUND:The mission of the Connecticut Injury Prevention Center (CIPC), jointly housed in Connecticut Children's Medical Center and Hartford Hospital, is to reduce unintentional injury and violence among Connecticut residents, with a special focus on translating research into injury prevention programmes and policy. The CIPC engages in four core activities: research, education and training, community outreach programmes and public policy. As surveillance is an essential element of injury prevention, the CIPC has developed a robust statewide fatal and non-fatal injury surveillance system that has guided our prior work and continues to inform our current projects. OBJECTIVE:The purpose of this article is to review the projects, programmes, and collaborative relationships that have made the CIPC successful in reducing unintentional injury and violence in Connecticut throughout the course of its 25 years history. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS/METHODS:Retrospective review of the application of injury surveillance. RESULTS/CONCLUSIONS/CONCLUSIONS:We believe that the application of our surveillance system can serve as a model for others who wish to engage in collaborative, community-based, data-driven injury prevention programmes in their own communities.

BACKGROUND:Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a source of severe health consequences, and therefore, health care organizations have recommended routine IPV screening. Implementing health-related screenings outside of health care facilities is common public health practice, but to date, IPV screening in hair salons has not been reported. The objective of this study was to determine the prevalence of IPV among women at hair salons. We hypothesized that women would disclose IPV in this setting and that rates of abuse would reflect national averages. METHODS:We recruited a convenience sample of hair salons in Connecticut in 2014. Hair stylists were trained on how to recognize and refer IPV victims. Self-reported IPV of salon clients was measured by a tablet-based validated screening tool, the Patient Satisfaction and Safety Survey. RESULTS:Overall, reported past-year prevalence of physical abuse was 3.6%, past-year prevalence of sexual abuse was 2.7%, lifetime prevalence of emotional or physical abuse was 34.2%, and 5.3% of the sample reported that they had been hurt that day by their current or former partner. Past-year physical abuse was more common among women 30 years to 39 years old (9.1%), black (9%), and single women (7.5%). Past-year sexual abuse was more common among women 20 years to 29 years old (13.8%), other races (6.7%), and single women (5.4%). Lifetime abuse was more common among women 50 years to 59 years old (13.8%), black (36.1%), and divorced women (69.7%). Hurt-today abuse was more common among women younger than 20 years (12.5%), other races (13.3%), and women in common law relationships (25%). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Women in our study reported IPV prevalence rates consistent with national data. Documentation of IPV prevalence in hair salons will provide much-needed support for novel interventions such as CUT IT OUT, a national program designed to train hair stylists on how to recognize and refer IPV victims.