Intimate Partner Violence, Sexual Assault, and Child Abuse Resource Utilization During COVID-19

Abstract

Introduction: Key measures in preventing spread of the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are social distancing and stay-at-home mandates. These measures along with other stressors have the potential to increase incidences of intimate partner violence (IPV), sexual assault, and child maltreatment. Methods: We performed a retrospective review of county police dispatches, emergency department (ED) visits, Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner (SANE) consults, Domestic Violence Healthcare Project (DVHP) team consults, and Child Protection Team consults at a large, tertiary, Level I trauma center. We queried International Classification of Diseases Revision 10 codes most specific to IPV, sexual assault, and child maltreatment from March–October 2020 compared to 2019. Similarly, the number of consults performed by SANE, DVHP, and our Child Protection Team were collected. We compared all ED visits and consultations to total ED visits for the reviewed time period. Finally, the total number of calls and referrals to a child advocacy center and resource call line for victims were recorded during this timeframe. Results: Police dispatches for IPV-related assaults increased by 266 reports from 2019 to 2020 (P = 0.015). Emergency department visits related to IPV increased from 0.11% of visits in 2019 to 0.15% in 2020 (P = 0.032), and DVHP consults increased from 0.31% in 2019 to 0.48% in 2020 of ED visits in the first three months (P < 0.001). Child maltreatment visits increased from 0.47% of visits in 2019 to 0.81% of visits in 2020 (P = 0.028), and a higher percentage of patients required Child Protection team consults from 1% in 2019 to 1.6% in 2020 (P = 0.004). Sexual assault-related visits and SANE consults both showed a small increase that was not statistically significant. Fewer calls and referrals were made to our child advocacy center and resource call line, decreasing by 99 referrals and 252 calls, respectively. Conclusion: Despite decreased ED volumes throughout the pandemic, we observed an increase in police dispatches, ED visits, and utilization of hospital consult services related to IPV and child maltreatment following the initiation of stay-at-home orders. However, use of community resources, such as the local child advocacy center, declined.

Maternal and Child Health Services Utilization During COVID-19 in Eastern Ethiopia

“…The study also found that there was a noticeable disruption in several service indicators related to child wellbeing, service delivery, and access to services [ 17 ]. A reduction in hospital deliveries, c-sections, family planning consultations, and child vaccinations was also confirmed by a mixed-methods comparative study conducted in Mozambique [ 18 ].…”

Reducing Family Violence Through Child Welfare Intervention: A Propensity Score-Matched Study of Fathers for Change

“…Overall CPS reports were significantly lower during this period due to lack of reports made by schools and families remaining at home (Baron et al, 2020). However, reports of IPV were increased (Pallansch et al, 2022) and police calls for service for IPV when there are children in the home are reported to CPS. Since cases were matched for both F4C and the control group for the same time period, we do not expect any differential impact on one group versus the other.…”

Intimate Partner Abuse and Homicide During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Situational Action Theory Analysis

“…Data on IPA comes from a variety of sources, captures different content, varies in quality, and often does not account for confounding factors. Key sources include the police (e.g., calls for service, arrests; Lausi et al, 2021;Pallansch et al, 2022;Trafford, 2022); IPV services (e.g., calls to hotlines, service utilization; Brink et al, 2021;Pallansch et al, 2022;Perez-Vincent et al, 2020;Romito et al, 2022;Soeiro et al, 2023); and health services (medical reports, health records; Gosangi et al, 2021;Hoffman et al, 2023;Lausi et al, 2021). Reporting may have increased as an extension of help-seeking and significant life changes, as observed in other natural disasters, and because people recognized acts as abusive that previously went unacknowledged (e.g., minor or infrequent IPA, or IPA by a new partner; Kaukinen, 2020;Trafford, 2022).…”

“…Monitoring also changed outside the home. Partners were, by definition, isolated from external parties who might monitor IPA, both formally-for example, health or social services (Lausi et al, 2021;Pallansch et al, 2022)-and informally-for example, friends and family (Andrade et al, 2022;Canzi et al, 2021;Vergauwen et al, 2022). However, the more continuous presence of neighbors counterbalanced some of the reduction in external monitoring, as evidenced by an increase in third-party calls to IPA services (Coomans et al, 2023;Eichelsheim et al, 2023;Ivandic et al, 2020;Perez-Vincent et al, 2020), potentially amplified by measures encouraging monitoring and reporting.…”

“…Changes in monitoring and reporting impacted the certainty and celerity of sanctions. This included formal sanctions as policing practices changed in some jurisdictions (Maskály et al, 2021; Miller et al, 2022; Pallansch et al, 2022; Trafford, 2022), for example, focusing on more severe incidents. Given reductions in and restrictions on services, victims may have been less likely to bring incidents to authorities’ attention.…”