A screening protocol for child abuse at out-of-hours primary care locations: a descriptive study

6Citations
Citations of this article
59Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: Child abuse is often unrecognized at out-of-hours primary care (OOH-PC) services. The aim of our study was to evaluate the clinical outcome of the screening instrument SPUTOVAMO-R2 for child abuse (checklist), followed by a structured approach (reporting code), at OOH-PC services. The reporting code with five steps should ensure consistent action in case of a suspicion. Methods: All children attending one of the five participating OOH-PC services in the region of Utrecht, the Netherlands, in a year time, were included. The checklist is an obligatory field in the electronic patient file and was filled in for all children. In case of a positive checklist, the steps in the reporting code were followed. Additionally, the case was evaluated in a multidisciplinary team to determine the probability of child abuse. Results: The checklist was filled in for 50671 children; 108 (0.2 %) were positive. The multidisciplinary team diagnosed child abuse in 24 (22 %) of the 108 positive checklists, and no child abuse in 36 (33 %). Emotional neglect was the most frequent type of abuse diagnosed. For all abused children, care was implemented according to the protocol. The most frequent care given was a referral to the hospital (N = 7) or contact with child's own general practitioner (N = 6). Conclusion: A checklist followed by a reporting code guarantees consistent actions and care for children with a suspicion of child abuse. The percentage of positive checklists is lower than expected. Validity of the checklist should be assessed in a diagnostic study.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Schouten, M. C. M., Van Stel, H. F., Verheij, T. J. M., Nieuwenhuis, E. E. S., & Van De Putte, E. M. (2016). A screening protocol for child abuse at out-of-hours primary care locations: a descriptive study. BMC Family Practice, 17(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-016-0554-4

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free