Barriers to Seeking Healthcare Services After Sexual Assault: A Scoping Review.

Marguerite B Lucea, Andrea Ramirez, Natalie Martino
{"title":"Barriers to Seeking Healthcare Services After Sexual Assault: A Scoping Review.","authors":"Marguerite B Lucea, Andrea Ramirez, Natalie Martino","doi":"10.1097/JFN.0000000000000493","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Sexual violence by an intimate partner or by a stranger remains highly prevalent in the United States. Yet, the use of post-sexual-assault health care is still underutilized. Persons in vulnerable populations such as immigrants, LGBTQIA+, and Black women may experience additional barriers to care.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>We sought to determine the extant research in this area, the methodologies used, and whether specific barriers exist for seeking sexual assault services. We sought to understand if barriers differed for vulnerable populations.</p><p><strong>Inclusion criteria: </strong>Peer-reviewed literature published before September 2023, written in English, conducted in the United States, and that included survivors of sexual violence and explored barriers to seeking care postassault (i.e., sexual assault nurse examiners) were included in the review.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews protocols were followed. PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and PTSDpubs databases were used to identify literature that met the inclusion criteria, from which we selected 14 publications.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Much of the literature employed qualitative or mixed methods designs. Several studies focused on underserved minority groups, including immigrant women, Black women, and homeless youth. Common barriers existed on the intrapersonal, interpersonal, organizational, community, and societal levels.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The literature provided substantive context for the multilevel barriers, all contributing to survivors remaining silent rather than seeking much-needed help. Although there is a need for additional research on barriers to sexual assault services specifically, the extant research supports strengthening multilevel, alternative approaches to deliver much-needed services.</p>","PeriodicalId":94079,"journal":{"name":"Journal of forensic nursing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of forensic nursing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/JFN.0000000000000493","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Sexual violence by an intimate partner or by a stranger remains highly prevalent in the United States. Yet, the use of post-sexual-assault health care is still underutilized. Persons in vulnerable populations such as immigrants, LGBTQIA+, and Black women may experience additional barriers to care.

Objective: We sought to determine the extant research in this area, the methodologies used, and whether specific barriers exist for seeking sexual assault services. We sought to understand if barriers differed for vulnerable populations.

Inclusion criteria: Peer-reviewed literature published before September 2023, written in English, conducted in the United States, and that included survivors of sexual violence and explored barriers to seeking care postassault (i.e., sexual assault nurse examiners) were included in the review.

Methods: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews protocols were followed. PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and PTSDpubs databases were used to identify literature that met the inclusion criteria, from which we selected 14 publications.

Results: Much of the literature employed qualitative or mixed methods designs. Several studies focused on underserved minority groups, including immigrant women, Black women, and homeless youth. Common barriers existed on the intrapersonal, interpersonal, organizational, community, and societal levels.

Conclusion: The literature provided substantive context for the multilevel barriers, all contributing to survivors remaining silent rather than seeking much-needed help. Although there is a need for additional research on barriers to sexual assault services specifically, the extant research supports strengthening multilevel, alternative approaches to deliver much-needed services.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
性侵犯后寻求医疗服务的障碍:范围审查。
背景:在美国,亲密伴侣或陌生人实施的性暴力仍然非常普遍。然而,性侵犯后的保健服务仍未得到充分利用。移民、女同性恋、男同性恋、双性恋、变性人和两性人以及黑人妇女等弱势群体可能会遇到更多的护理障碍:我们试图确定该领域的现有研究、使用的方法以及寻求性侵犯服务是否存在特定障碍。我们试图了解弱势群体所面临的障碍是否有所不同:综述包括 2023 年 9 月之前发表的同行评审文献,以英语撰写,在美国进行,包含性暴力幸存者,并探讨了寻求性侵犯后护理(即性侵犯护士检查)的障碍:方法:遵循《系统综述和荟萃分析扩展报告首选项目》(Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews)协议。我们使用 PubMed、Scopus、CINAHL、PsycINFO 和 PTSDpubs 数据库来确定符合纳入标准的文献,并从中筛选出 14 篇出版物:大部分文献采用了定性或混合方法设计。有几项研究关注的是服务不足的少数群体,包括移民妇女、黑人妇女和无家可归的青年。共同的障碍存在于个人、人际、组织、社区和社会层面:文献提供了多层次障碍的实质性背景,所有这些障碍都导致幸存者保持沉默,而不是寻求急需的帮助。尽管需要对性侵犯服务的具体障碍进行更多研究,但现有研究支持加强多层次的替代方法,以提供急需的服务。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Forensic Mental Health Nurses' Perceptions and Experiences of Trauma-Informed Care in a High-Secure Hospital. A Canadian Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner's Personal Reflection and Ongoing Questioning of Vicarious Trauma. Emergency Department Workers' Perceived Support and Emotional Impact After Workplace Violence. Reporting Intimate Partner Violence in the Healthcare Setting. Pain During Incarceration: Searching for Safety in Hypermasculine Correctional Settings.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1