Response of the Primary Health Care Professionals to Domestic Violence - Serbian a mixed method review

Snezana Knezevic

Keywords: Domestic Violence, Detection, Counselling, Advocacy

The ‘Implementation of Primary health care and advocacy for family violence’ (IMOCAFV) project aims to stimulate the implementation of good practices for family violence care by general practitioners/family physicians internationally. Serbian national coordinators of IMOCAFV project are Snežana Knežević (MSc) and Prof Bosiljka Đikanović (PhD), in collaboration with Lodewijk Pas (MD), Belgium, Carmen Fernandez Alonso and Raquel Gomez Bravo (Coordinating committee of IMOCAFV) and Nell Van hansewyck. The Ethical Committee from University of Luxemburg (ERP 20-040-C IMOCAFV) approved the ongoing project in 2019.

Research questions:
What should be tasks for primary health care of family violence and how to improve their implementation?

An analysis of family violence policies is based on a multi-country scoping review about good practices and a keyperson inquiry on views about implementation. Statements studied in scoping review as well as keyperson questionnaire relate to policies, detection, counseling, collaborative care, barriers, facilitators and implementation strategies.

The search included guidance documents, web and other publications of Serbian origin in consensus between two researchers (SK, BD). It identified 1408 items; 29 documents were retained with Primary care task description, collaborative care principles. The Serbian team translated and back-translated an internationally developed inquiry. A quantitative and qualitative analysis of both the keyperson views and Serbian documentation is performed. Consensus interpretation codes (SK& BD) are entered with translated quotes into an English common database and compared to independent coding by two foreign researchers (NvH & LP).

The analysis of both Serbian sets of data will result in statements to be submitted to local nominal groups in Serbia to define proposals for good practice and implementation taking into account the local context. Statements retained nationally will be thereafter submitted online during 2022 in three Delphi rounds online both in Serbia and other participating countries.

Points for discussion:
1. What are advantages and disadvantages of the double coding process at national and international level?

2. Can keyperson views and scoping review on policies and tasks complement each other and permit adequate triangulation of results?

3. Is the nominal group technique an adequate methodology to prepare the further consensus development on implementation?