Efficacy of a 2-year-old sexual assault nurse examiner program in a Canadian hospital.

L. Stermac, Tania Stirpe
{"title":"Efficacy of a 2-year-old sexual assault nurse examiner program in a Canadian hospital.","authors":"L. Stermac, Tania Stirpe","doi":"10.1067/MEN.2002.119975","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"INTRODUCTION\nThe purpose of this study was to describe a sexual assault nurse examiner (SANE) program at a hospital-based sexual assault care center in Ontario, Canada, and assess its efficacy in comparison with physician examiners.\n\n\nMETHODS\nData obtained from the hospital records of 515 women who came to a Toronto sexual assault care center were examined. A number of variables relevant to this assessment of services were examined, including client demographics and presenting history, aspects of the sexual assault, and characteristics of the treatment.\n\n\nRESULTS\nAverage assessment times were shorter for victims seen by SANEs than for victims seen by physicians (approximately 3(1/4) hours versus 4 hours). Physicians had more interruptions (25.1%) than did SANEs (20.0%). Client characteristics and presentation were similar regardless of who provided care, with some exceptions.\n\n\nDISCUSSION\nThe results of the study support the utility of the SANE model as an efficient program for the assessment and treatment of victims of sexual assault.","PeriodicalId":15691,"journal":{"name":"Journal of emergency nursing: JEN : official publication of the Emergency Department Nurses Association","volume":"15 1","pages":"18-23"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2002-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"31","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of emergency nursing: JEN : official publication of the Emergency Department Nurses Association","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1067/MEN.2002.119975","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 31

Abstract

INTRODUCTION The purpose of this study was to describe a sexual assault nurse examiner (SANE) program at a hospital-based sexual assault care center in Ontario, Canada, and assess its efficacy in comparison with physician examiners. METHODS Data obtained from the hospital records of 515 women who came to a Toronto sexual assault care center were examined. A number of variables relevant to this assessment of services were examined, including client demographics and presenting history, aspects of the sexual assault, and characteristics of the treatment. RESULTS Average assessment times were shorter for victims seen by SANEs than for victims seen by physicians (approximately 3(1/4) hours versus 4 hours). Physicians had more interruptions (25.1%) than did SANEs (20.0%). Client characteristics and presentation were similar regardless of who provided care, with some exceptions. DISCUSSION The results of the study support the utility of the SANE model as an efficient program for the assessment and treatment of victims of sexual assault.
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
加拿大一家医院2年的性侵犯护士审查员项目的效果。
本研究的目的是描述加拿大安大略省一家医院性侵犯护理中心的性侵犯护士审查员(SANE)计划,并评估其与医师审查员的比较效果。方法对来多伦多某性侵犯护理中心就诊的515名妇女的病历资料进行分析。研究了与服务评估相关的一些变量,包括客户人口统计数据和呈现历史、性侵犯的各个方面以及治疗的特点。结果SANEs患者的平均评估时间短于医师患者(约3(1/4)小时vs . 4小时)。内科医生(25.1%)比SANEs(20.0%)有更多的中断。除了一些例外,无论谁提供护理,患者的特征和表现都是相似的。讨论:研究结果支持了SANE模型作为评估和治疗性侵犯受害者的有效方案的实用性。
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
What would you do? Village Contamination in Adult Midstream Clean-Catch Urine Cultures in the Emergency Department: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Innovating Emergency Nursing Tools and Technology: Work Design for Quality and Patient Safety. Weight! Weight! … Don't Tell Me!
×
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