This study sought to understand the effects of COVID-19, including movement-related restrictions such as shelter-in-place, quarantine, and isolation orders, on intimate partner violence (IPV) from the perspective of health care providers (HCPs) working at a public hospital in Atlanta, Georgia. From November 2020 to May 2021, we conducted 12 interviews. Three themes emerged: (1) HCPs perceived that COVID-19 movement-related restrictions likely exacerbated IPV; (2) HCPs encountered many practice-oriented and community barriers in IPV care provision during COVID-19; and (3) HCPs suggested process and partnership improvements for IPV response. These findings can inform future pandemic preparedness including improved communication, improved IPV screening and follow-up, and strengthened hospital-community partnerships.

Background: Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) poses a serious public health threat globally and within the United States. Preliminary evidence highlighted surges in IPV during the COVID-19 pandemic. The pandemic offers a unique context, with many states and countries enacting movement-restrictions (i.e., shelter-in-place orders) that exacerbated IPV. Although these movement restrictions and other infection control methods (i.e., isolation, quarantine orders) have proven successful in reducing the spread of COVID-19, their impacts on IPV have not been thoroughly investigated. Specifically, public health measures restricting movement reinforce and socially legitimize isolation and coercive control tactics enacted by perpetrators of abuse. The purpose of this study was to understand the impacts of COVID-19, including the impacts of movement restrictions (i.e., shelter in place orders, quarantine, isolation orders) on experiences of IPV from the perspective of survivors. Methods: In-depth interviews were conducted with ten survivors who presented at a large, public hospital or sought community IPV resources (i.e., domestic violence shelter, therapy services) in Atlanta, Georgia between March and December 2020. Thematic analysis was carried out to describe the impact of COVID-19 movement restrictions on IPV and help-seeking behaviors among survivors, in addition to identifying resources to improve IPV response during pandemics. Results: Through discussion of their experiences, survivors indicated how movement restrictions, social distancing measures, and the repercussions of the pandemic influenced their relationship challenges, including the occurrence of new or a higher frequency and/or severity of IPV episodes. Survivors cited relationship challenges that were amplified by either movement restrictions or consequences of COVID-19, including reinforced control tactics, and increased financial or life stressors resulting from the pandemic. COVID-19 movement restrictions catalyzed new relationships quickly and sparked new or intensified violence in existing relationships, revealing gaps in IPV support services. Conclusion: These findings suggest COVID-19 movement restrictions and social distancing measures amplify IPV and experiences of trauma due to new or exacerbated relationship challenges. Further, results highlight how partners cited COVID-19 movement restrictions to justify methods of coercive control. Public health professionals engaged in pandemic preparedness must give serious consideration to how social distancing measures may amplify trauma in those experiencing IPV.

Detention facilities in the southern US hold a large percentage of individuals detained in the US and have amassed numerous reports of medical mismanagement. The purpose of this study was to evaluate expert declarations of individuals residing in these facilities to assess the appropriateness of medical care provided. We analyzed 38 medical expert declarations from individuals in detention from 2020 to 2021. A thematic analysis was conducted to explore the management of medical conditions. Major themes include inadequate workup, management and treatment of medical conditions, psychiatric conditions, and medical symptoms. Subthemes identified include incorrect workup, failure to refer to a specialist, incorrect medications and/or treatments, missed or incorrect diagnoses, and exacerbation of chronic conditions. This study supports growing evidence of medical mismanagement and neglect of individuals while in immigration detention. Enhanced oversight and accountability around medical care in these facilities is critical to ensure the quality of medical care delivered meets the standard of care.

Introduction: To address persistent gender inequities in academic medicine, women professional development groups (PDG) have been developed to support the advancement of women in medicine. While these programs have shown promising outcomes, long-term evaluative metrics do not currently exist. The objective of this study was to establish metrics to assess women’s PDGs. Methods: This was a modified Delphi study that included an expert panel of current and past emergency department (ED) chairs and Academy for Women in Academic Emergency Medicine (AWAEM) presidents. The panel completed three iterative surveys to develop and rank metrics to assess women PDGs. Metrics established by the expert panel were also distributed for member-checking to women EM faculty. Results: The expert panel ranked 11 metrics with high to moderate consensus ranking with three metrics receiving greater than 90% consensus: gender equity strategy and plan; recruitment; and compensation. Members ranked 12 metrics with high consensus with three metrics receiving greater than 90% consensus: gender equity strategy and plan; compensation; and gender equity in promotion rates among faculty. Participants emphasized that departments should be responsible for leading gender equity efforts with PDGs providing a supportive role. Conclusion: In this study, we identified metrics that can be used to assess academic EDs’ gender equity initiatives and the advisory efforts of a departmental women’s PDG. These metrics can be tailored to individual departmental/institutional needs, as well as to a PDG’s mission. Importantly, PDGs can use metrics to develop and assess programming, acknowledging that many metrics are the responsibility of the department rather than the PDG.

Introduction: The application of structural competency and structural vulnerability to emergency medicine (EM) research has not been previously described despite EM researchers routinely engaging structurally vulnerable populations. The purpose of this study was to conduct a scoping review and consensus-building process to develop a structurally competent research approach and operational framework relevant to EM research. Methods: We conducted a scoping review focused on structural competency and structural vulnerability. Results of the review informed the development of a structural competency research framework that was presented throughout a multi-step consensus process culminating in the 2021 Society for Academic Emergency Medicine Consensus Conference. Feedback to the framework was incorporated throughout the conference. Results: The scoping review produced 291 articles with 123 articles relevant to EM research. All 123 articles underwent full-text review and data extraction following a standardized data extraction form. Most of the articles acknowledged or described structures that lead to inequities with a variety of methodological approaches used to operationalize structural competency and/or structural vulnerability. The framework developed aligned with components of the research process, drawing upon methodologies from studies included in the scoping review. Conclusion: The framework developed provides a starting point for EM researchers seeking to understand, acknowledge, and incorporate structural competency into EM research. By incorporating components of the framework, researchers may enhance their ability to address social, historical, political, and economic forces that lead to health inequities, reframing drivers of inequities away from individual factors and focusing on structural factors.

Introduction: Intimate partner violence (IPV) is defined as sexual, physical, psychological, or economic violence that occurs between current or former intimate partners. Victims of IPV may seek care for violence-related injuries in healthcare settings, which makes recognition and intervention in these facilities critical. In this study our goal was to develop an algorithm using natural language processing (NLP) to identify cases of IPV within emergency department (ED) settings. Methods: In this observational cohort study, we extracted unstructured physician and advanced practice provider, nursing, and social worker notes from hospital electronic health records (EHR). The recorded clinical notes and patient narratives were screened for a set of 23 situational terms, derived from the literature on IPV (ie, assault by spouse), along with an additional set of 49 extended situational terms, extracted from known IPV cases (ie, attack by spouse). We compared the effectiveness of the proposed model with detection of IPV-related International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision, codes. Results: We included in the analysis a total of 1,064,735 patient encounters (405,303 patients who visited the ED of a Level I trauma center) from January 2012–August 2020. The outcome was identification of an IPV-related encounter. In this study we used information embedded in unstructured EHR data to develop a NLP algorithm that employs clinical notes to identify IPV visits to the ED. Using a set of 23 situational terms along with 49 extended situational terms, the algorithm successfully identified 7,399 IPV-related encounters representing 5,975 patients; the algorithm achieved 99.5% precision in detecting positive cases in our sample of 1,064,735 ED encounters. Conclusion: Using a set of pre-defined IPV-related terms, we successfully developed a novel natural language processing algorithm capable of identifying intimate partner violence.

Implicit bias training is not currently a required component of residency education, yet implicit bias in medicine exists and may influence care provided to patients. We propose an innovative exercise that allows trainees to explore implicit bias outside of the clinical environment, in an interdisciplinary manner with museum anthropologists and archaeologists. The curriculum was designed with leaders at the Penn Museum and focuses on differentiating between objective and subjective assessments of historical objects. The first part of the exercise consists of a pre-brief, to introduce trainees to bias through the lens of an anthropologist/archaeologist. The second part guides trainees through "deep description," where they explore objective and subjective findings of three different objects. The exercise concludes with a debrief and application of concepts learned to everyday clinical practice. This innovation was successful at introducing trainees to implicit bias in a nontraditional environment, and participants reported an improved understanding of implicit bias. Residency programs could consider partnering with local museums to implement a similar exercise as a component of conference curriculum.

Equity in the promotion of women and underrepresented minorities (URiM) is essential for the advancement of academic emergency medicine and the specialty as a whole. Forward‐thinking healthcare organizations can best position themselves to optimally care for an increasingly diverse patient population and mentor trainees by championing increased diversity in senior faculty ranks, leadership, and governance roles. This article explores several potential solutions to addressing inequities that hinder the advancement of women and URiM faculty. It is intended to complement the recently approved American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) policy statement aimed at overcoming barriers to promotion of women and URiM faculty in academic emergency medicine. This policy statement was jointly released and supported by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine (SAEM), American Academy of Emergency Medicine (AAEM), and the Association of Academic Chairs of Emergency Medicine (AACEM).

Risks of intimate partner violence (IPV) escalated during the COVID-19 pandemic given mitigation measures, socioeconomic hardships, and isolation concerns. The objective of this study was to explore the impact of COVID-19 on the incidence of IPV. We conducted an interrupted time series analysis for IPV incidence at a single level 1 trauma center located in the United States. IPV cases were identified by triangulation of institutional data sources. There were 4,624 traumatic injuries of which 292 (6.3%) were due to IPV. IPV-related injury admissions increased 17% in the weeks following the COVID lockdown (RR = 1.17; 95% CI: 1.16, 1.19). Over a quarter of victims (27.4%) were male. Compared to before COVID, victims of IPV during the pandemic were younger (p =.04); no difference in mechanism or severity of injury was found. Our results suggest an ongoing need for universal IPV screening during health emergencies to avoid missed opportunities for IPV detection and referral to support services.