Violence against emergency healthcare workers: different perpetrators, different approaches

IF 0.7 Q4 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY Journal of Aggression Conflict and Peace Research Pub Date : 2022-02-04 DOI:10.1108/jacpr-10-2021-0645
E. Spelten, Julia van Vuuren, P. O'Meara, Brodie Thomas, Mathieu Grenier, Richard Ferron, J. Helmer, G. Agarwal
{"title":"Violence against emergency healthcare workers: different perpetrators, different approaches","authors":"E. Spelten, Julia van Vuuren, P. O'Meara, Brodie Thomas, Mathieu Grenier, Richard Ferron, J. Helmer, G. Agarwal","doi":"10.1108/jacpr-10-2021-0645","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThis study aims to investigate whether emergency health-care workers distinguish between different categories of perpetrators of violence and how they respond to different types of perpetrator profiles.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nFive focus groups with emergency health-care workers were held in Canada. The participants were asked whether they identified different groups of perpetrators of violence and how that impacted their approach. The focus group responses were transcribed verbatim and analysed thematically using a phenomenological approach.\n\n\nFindings\nParticipants consistently identified five groups of perpetrators and tailored their approach on their assessment of the type of perpetrator involved. The five categories are: violence or aggressive behaviour from family members or bystander and violence related to; underlying mental health/illness issues; underlying physical health issues; addiction and substance use; and repeat visitors/offenders. Violence with an underlying (mental) health cause was handled professionally and compassionately by the health-care workers, while less patience and understanding was afforded in those instances where violence was associated with (recreational) alcohol or illicit substance use.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nEmergency health-care workers can consistently distinguish between types of perpetrators of violence and aggression, which they then use as one factor in the clinical and situational assessments that inform their overall approach to the management incidents. This conclusion supports the need to move the focus away from the worker to the perpetrator and to an organisational rather than individual approach to help minimise violence against emergency health-care workers.\n","PeriodicalId":45499,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Aggression Conflict and Peace Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Aggression Conflict and Peace Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jacpr-10-2021-0645","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Purpose This study aims to investigate whether emergency health-care workers distinguish between different categories of perpetrators of violence and how they respond to different types of perpetrator profiles. Design/methodology/approach Five focus groups with emergency health-care workers were held in Canada. The participants were asked whether they identified different groups of perpetrators of violence and how that impacted their approach. The focus group responses were transcribed verbatim and analysed thematically using a phenomenological approach. Findings Participants consistently identified five groups of perpetrators and tailored their approach on their assessment of the type of perpetrator involved. The five categories are: violence or aggressive behaviour from family members or bystander and violence related to; underlying mental health/illness issues; underlying physical health issues; addiction and substance use; and repeat visitors/offenders. Violence with an underlying (mental) health cause was handled professionally and compassionately by the health-care workers, while less patience and understanding was afforded in those instances where violence was associated with (recreational) alcohol or illicit substance use. Originality/value Emergency health-care workers can consistently distinguish between types of perpetrators of violence and aggression, which they then use as one factor in the clinical and situational assessments that inform their overall approach to the management incidents. This conclusion supports the need to move the focus away from the worker to the perpetrator and to an organisational rather than individual approach to help minimise violence against emergency health-care workers.
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
针对急救医护人员的暴力:不同的施暴者,不同的做法
目的本研究旨在调查急救医护人员是否区分不同类别的暴力施暴者,以及他们如何应对不同类型的施暴者。设计/方法/方法在加拿大举办了五个由急救医护人员组成的重点小组。参与者被问及是否确定了不同的暴力肇事者群体,以及这对他们的做法产生了怎样的影响。焦点小组的回答被逐字转录,并使用现象学方法进行主题分析。调查结果参与者一致确定了五组犯罪者,并根据他们对所涉犯罪者类型的评估调整了他们的方法。这五类是:家庭成员或旁观者的暴力或攻击行为以及与之有关的暴力;潜在的心理健康/疾病问题;潜在的身体健康问题;成瘾和药物使用;以及惯犯。医护人员以专业和同情的态度处理了与潜在(心理)健康原因有关的暴力行为,而在与(娱乐)酒精或非法药物使用有关的暴力事件中,则缺乏耐心和理解。独创性/价值急救医护人员可以始终如一地区分暴力和侵犯行为人的类型,然后将其作为临床和情境评估的一个因素,为他们处理事件的整体方法提供信息。这一结论支持有必要将重点从工作人员转移到施暴者身上,并转向组织而非个人的方法,以帮助最大限度地减少针对急救医护人员的暴力行为。
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
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
32
期刊最新文献
Why do they decide to stay? Experience of Indian women surviving intimate partner violence Invited commentary on using music intervention and imagined interaction to deal with aggression and conflict The appreciation of the collaboration agreements used to prevent intrafamilial homicides State responses to herder–farmers conflict and peace-building in rural grazing areas of Nigeria To stay silent or to blow the whistle? Bystander’s intervening acts when witnessing intimate partner violence (IPV)
×
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