Prevalence of Weapons in the Health Care Setting: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Sarayna S McGuire, Casey M Clements, Dana J Gerberi, M Hassan Murad
{"title":"Prevalence of Weapons in the Health Care Setting: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Sarayna S McGuire, Casey M Clements, Dana J Gerberi, M Hassan Murad","doi":"10.1016/j.mayocpiqo.2024.11.004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study aimed to systematicically evaluate and quantify the prevalence of weapons in the health care setting. A systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, CINAHL, and EBSCO MegaFILE was performed from inception to January 12, 2024. The primary outcome was the prevalence of weapons in the health care setting on patients and/or visitors. Prevalence was pooled across studies and estimated using a random effects model. Subgroup analyses were done based on types of weapons, characteristics of weapon carriers, weapons screening/detection technology, and screened population characteristics. A total of 14 observational studies were included. All studies were from the United States and were published between 1984 and 2023. Weapons prevalence ranged from 0.4% to 26.3% among populations screened in the included studies. The overall pooled weapons prevalence was 4.0% (95% CI, 2.0%-7.8%). Most weapons were bladed (3.8%; 95% CI, 1.5%-8.9%), followed by other weapons (0.6%; 95% CI, 0.3%-1.3%), and firearms (0.1%; 95% CI, 0.02%-0.5%; <i>P</i><.01). Weapons prevalence was 2.0% (95% CI, 0.7%-5.8%) among individuals entering the hospital setting, compared with 1.6% (95% CI, 0.7%-3.4%) of individuals entering the emergency department and highest (24.3%; 95% CI, 21.6%-27.2%) when major trauma patients were hand-searched. Prevalence was higher in males than that in females (11.1% vs 3.1%; <i>P</i>=.01). Weapons should be expected on individuals presenting to hospitals in the United States; however, prevalence varied widely based on the setting, type of patients, and detection method.</p>","PeriodicalId":94132,"journal":{"name":"Mayo Clinic proceedings. Innovations, quality & outcomes","volume":"9 1","pages":"100587"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11713507/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Mayo Clinic proceedings. Innovations, quality & outcomes","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mayocpiqo.2024.11.004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study aimed to systematicically evaluate and quantify the prevalence of weapons in the health care setting. A systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, CINAHL, and EBSCO MegaFILE was performed from inception to January 12, 2024. The primary outcome was the prevalence of weapons in the health care setting on patients and/or visitors. Prevalence was pooled across studies and estimated using a random effects model. Subgroup analyses were done based on types of weapons, characteristics of weapon carriers, weapons screening/detection technology, and screened population characteristics. A total of 14 observational studies were included. All studies were from the United States and were published between 1984 and 2023. Weapons prevalence ranged from 0.4% to 26.3% among populations screened in the included studies. The overall pooled weapons prevalence was 4.0% (95% CI, 2.0%-7.8%). Most weapons were bladed (3.8%; 95% CI, 1.5%-8.9%), followed by other weapons (0.6%; 95% CI, 0.3%-1.3%), and firearms (0.1%; 95% CI, 0.02%-0.5%; P<.01). Weapons prevalence was 2.0% (95% CI, 0.7%-5.8%) among individuals entering the hospital setting, compared with 1.6% (95% CI, 0.7%-3.4%) of individuals entering the emergency department and highest (24.3%; 95% CI, 21.6%-27.2%) when major trauma patients were hand-searched. Prevalence was higher in males than that in females (11.1% vs 3.1%; P=.01). Weapons should be expected on individuals presenting to hospitals in the United States; however, prevalence varied widely based on the setting, type of patients, and detection method.

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
卫生保健环境中武器的流行:系统回顾和荟萃分析。
本研究旨在系统地评估和量化卫生保健环境中武器的流行程度。系统检索MEDLINE、Embase、Scopus、Web of Science、CINAHL和EBSCO MegaFILE,检索时间从成立到2024年1月12日。主要结果是卫生保健机构对病人和/或访客使用武器的普遍程度。患病率汇总了所有研究,并使用随机效应模型进行估计。根据武器类型、武器携带者特征、武器筛查/检测技术和筛查人群特征进行亚组分析。共纳入14项观察性研究。所有的研究都来自美国,发表于1984年至2023年之间。在纳入研究的人群中,武器流行率从0.4%到26.3%不等。总体合并武器患病率为4.0% (95% CI, 2.0%-7.8%)。大多数武器是带刃的(3.8%);95% CI, 1.5%-8.9%),其次是其他武器(0.6%;95% CI, 0.3%-1.3%)和火器(0.1%;95% ci, 0.02%-0.5%;页= . 01)。在美国,到医院就诊的人应该携带武器;然而,根据环境、患者类型和检测方法的不同,患病率差异很大。
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
Mayo Clinic proceedings. Innovations, quality & outcomes
Mayo Clinic proceedings. Innovations, quality & outcomes Surgery, Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine, Public Health and Health Policy
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
49 days
期刊最新文献
Utility of Noninvasive Testing Before Invasive Coronary Angiography in the Assessment for Revascularization. Prevalence of Weapons in the Health Care Setting: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. The Financial Impact of Ehlers-Danlos Syndromes on Patients in the United States in 2022. Use of Complementary and Integrative Medicine Among Low-Income Persons With Mental Health Disorders.
×
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