PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

L R Chambliss

Publications and source records attributed to L R Chambliss.

5 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2000

A randomized controlled study of brief interventions to teach residents about domestic violence.

PURPOSE: To test an educational intervention regarding domestic violence. METHOD: Residents beginning their training in 1995 or 1996 were randomly assigned to attend, at their hospital orientation, either a 20-minute session emphasizing the importance of screening for domestic violence or a session on an unrelated topic. RESULTS: Seventy-one percent of the residents in the experimental group diagnosed domestic violence; 52% in the control did so (RR, 1.35; 95% CI, 0.96-1.90; p = .07) in the nine to 12 months following the intervention. Rates of diagnosis differed by specialty (p < .01): 100% family practice, 90% emergency medicine, 80% obstetrics-gynecology, 63% pediatrics, 47% internal medicine, 0% surgery. Change in knowledge was assessed in 1996; significant improvement was noted (p = .002). CONCLUSION: An intervention about domestic violence conducted at orientation for residents improved the rate of diagnosis of domestic violence. While the improvement was not statistically significant in this case, the intervention was brief and harmless. Other institutions should consider this kind of brief intervention.

Clinical Competence↗
PubMed1995

Domestic violence: an educational imperative?

OBJECTIVE: Domestic violence is the most common cause of injury to women. Obstetrician-gynecologists, who most women consider their primary care physicians, have a unique role in identifying battered women. This study was designed to assess the extent and nature of current training curricula regarding domestic violence education in obstetrics and gynecology residencies. STUDY DESIGN: A survey sent to all obstetrics and gynecology residencies requested demographic data, the curriculum in respect to domestic violence, availability of interested faculty, the prevalence of battering among patients, satisfaction with the current teaching, and knowledge of pending legislation. Respondents were also asked which of 10 common clinical presentations would prompt their faculty to discuss the possibility the patient was being battered. RESULTS: Eighty-three percent of programs responded. The "typical" program was urban, had five residents per year, and had faculties of full-time academicians and part-time private practitioners. Twenty-eight percent reported having at least one faculty member with expertise in domestic violence. One third reported a prevalence of battering of < or = 1% with 6% estimating fewer than 1 in 1000. Seventy-five percent did not recognize at least one clinical scenario as suggestive of battering. The majority were dissatisfied with their teaching and wanted help in curriculum development. Forty percent were unaware of pending legislation linking federal support of medical education to including domestic violence in curricula. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this survey highlight deficiencies in the education of obstetrics and gynecology residents about domestic violence. Programs report limited faculty interest, underestimate prevalence, fail to recognize common presentations, and are dissatisfied with their current curriculum. We are not preparing obstetrics and gynecology residents to care for patients with a common problem--domestic violence.

Domestic Violence↗
PubMed1992

The role of selection bias in comparing cesarean birth rates between physician and midwifery management.

OBJECTIVE: The midwifery service at our hospital has been observed to have a 2% cesarean birth rate consistently over a 10-year period. There are substantial differences in labor management style between the midwives and physicians. We sought to test the hypothesis that the low cesarean birth rate on the midwifery service was the result of patient selection bias. METHODS: A randomized blinded clinical trial was conducted in which 492 low-risk patients were assigned to either physician or midwifery management. The provider responsible for labor management was unable to determine group assignment. Patients in the midwifery group were managed by previously established protocols, and outcome was attributed to the midwives even if the patients subsequently required transfer to physician management. Route of delivery was the primary outcome measurement. Continuous variables were analyzed using Student t test and discrete variables using chi 2. RESULTS: There were no demographic differences between the groups, and the admission pelvic examinations were the same. The patients assigned to the midwifery group had a 2.1% cesarean birth rate, whereas those assigned to physician management had a 0.4% rate. The higher rate of operative vaginal deliveries in the physician group was statistically significant. There were no differences in neonatal outcomes. The physician-managed group had significantly more episiotomies and third- and fourth-degree extensions. CONCLUSIONS: The 2% cesarean birth rate observed on the midwifery service appeared to be the result of patient selection bias. A low cesarean birth rate can be achieved by either physician or midwifery management in a selected low-risk population.

Adult↗