Table 1 Study characteristics

Arboit et al. [42]

2020

(Brazil)

Determine the potential and limitations of Primary Health Care professionals to identify situations of violence against women.

Semi-structured interview

Health providers/professionals

n = 21

< 5

Aziz et al. [51]

2019

(Egypt)

Assess perceptions and practices of screening for DV and to identify predictors of their attitude and behaviour of screening for DV in Assiut University Hospital.

Focus-group discussions

Physicians and nurses

n = 22

< 5

Danitz et al. [23]

2019

(USA)

Focus on feedback from a wide array of providers regarding the acceptability and feasibility of RISE, and associated recommendations for refinements of content and context in order to increase the likelihood of the usefulness, acceptability, and feasibility of the RISE intervention to VHA providers, the end-users, should RISE prove to be effective.

Semi-structured telephone interviews

Health providers/professionals

n = 2

< 10

Gomez-Fernandez et al. [45]

2019

(Spain)

Use reflections of primary care midwives to know the barriers and facilitators for detecting IPV during pregnancy.

Semi-structured individual interviews

Midwives

n = 12

10+

Hatcher et al. [46]

2019

(South Africa)

Explore the views of patients, health providers, and community members around assessing and addressing IPV in this setting.

In-depth interviews and focus group discussions

Health providers/professionals

n = 8

N/S

Rahmqvist et al. [40]

2019 (Sweden)

Describe nurses’ experiences when caring for victims of violence and their family members in the emergency department.

Semi-structured interviews

Registered nurses

n = 12

10+

Sun et al. [49]

2019

(China)

Investigate the barriers of Chinese PCPs toward managing DV, including barriers of recognition, management, and referrals of these patients.

Focus-group discussions

Primary Care Physicians

n = 26

10+

van der Wath [47]

2019

(South Africa)

Uncover discourses that may help understand emergency nurses’ responses towards women exposed to intimate partner violence.

Semi-structured focus group discussions

Nurses

n = 15

N/S

Wild et al. [48]

2019

(Australia)

Investigate the barriers midwives face in identifying, enquiring, responding and referring.

In-depth interviews and group discussions

Midwives

n = 36

10+

Wyatt et al. [30]

2019

(USA)

Identify if recently licensed registered nurses screen for intimate partner violence, how they screen, which patients are screened, and how pre- licensure education and current workplace training has influenced these screening decisions and behaviours.

Interviews

Nurses

n = 16

< 5

Alvarez et al. [21]

2018

(USA)

Describe how healthcare workers serving primarily low-income Latina populations are currently screening and responding to IPV disclosure.

Semi-structured interviews

Health providers/professionals

n = 17

10+

Horwood et al. [36]

2018

(UK)

Explore the perceptions and experiences of sexual health clinic staff and DVA advocates after participation in the IRIS ADViSE pilot and to investigate factors which may influence implementation and outcomes.

Semi-structured interviews

Health providers/professionals

n = 17

N/S

Henriksen et al. [57]

2017

(Norway)

Gain an in-depth understanding of midwives’ experiences with routine enquiry for intimate partner violence during the antenatal period.

Semi-structured interviews

Midwives

n =

< 10

Jack et al. [33]

2017

(Canada)

Develop strategies for the identification and assessment of intimate partner violence in a nurse home visitation programme.

Focus-group and individual interviews

Nurses

n = 32

N/S

McCauley et al. [37]

2017

(UK)

Investigate the knowledge and perceptions of domestic violence among doctors who provide routine antenatal and postnatal care at healthcare facilities in Pakistan. In addition, we explored possible management options, enabling factors of and barriers to routine screening of domestic violence.

Semi-structured interviews

Doctors (providing routine antenatal and postnatal care)

n = 25

10+

Sundborg et al. [41]

2017

(Sweden)

Improve the understanding of DNs’ experiences of encountering women exposed to IPV.

In-depth interviews

District nurses

n = 11

N/S

Williams et al. [28]

2017

(USA)

Examine variations in the implementation of IPV screening practices and to explore both barriers and facilitators that providers experience.

Semi-structured, in-depth interviews

Health providers/professionals

n = 10

N/S

Zijilstra et al. [60]

2017

(The Netherlands)

Explore if similar barriers to identification and management of IPV played a role at a Dutch ED to find possible angles for improving care for victims of IPV.

Semi-structured interviews

Emergency Department

n = 18

> 5

Al-Natour et al. [20]

2016

(USA)

Describe Jordanian nurses’ roles and practices in screening for intimate partner violence.

Semi-structured interviews

Nurses

n = 12

N/S

Bender [22]

2016

(USA)

Explore and describe healthcare providers’ and survivors’ perspectives on IPV with the aim of improving healthcare delivery in rural communities.

Semi-structured interviews

Health providers/professionals

n = 7

10+

Fay-Hillier et al. [24]

2016

(USA)

Explore IPV screening practices of RNs who currently work in the ED and what influenced their screening practices.

Semi-structured interviews

Registered Nurses

n = 21

10+

Kopcavar et al. [58]

2016

(Slovenia)

Obtain a deeper insight into the attitudes of physicians towards screening for domestic violence. We wanted to identify the barriers to screening for violence of family doctors in their respective populations, and to learn about their experiences and obstacles in the active detection of violence.

Semi-structured interviews

Family doctors (working in rural or urban environments)

n = 10

N/S

Pitter [54]

2016

(Jamaica)

Assess midwives’ knowledge and attitudes when encountering GBV in their practice in Kingston, Jamaica.

Focus-group discussions

Midwives

n = 6

> 5

Wilson et al. [29]

2016

(USA)

Explore the experiences of healthcare providers who have screened for and/ or addressed IPV with MSFW women patients.

In-depth interviews

Health providers/professionals

n = 9

N/S

Visentin et al. [43]

2015

(Brazil)

Identify the actions conducted by primary health care nurses for women in situations of domestic violence.

Semi-structured interviews

Nurses

n = 17

> 10

Briones-Vozmediano et al. [44]

2014

(Spain)

Explore the experience of service providers in Spain regarding their daily professional encounters with battered immigrant women as well as their perception of this group’s help-seeking process and the eventual abandonment of the same.

In-depth interviews and focus-group discussions

Health providers/professionals

n = 9

N/S

Gotlib Conn et al. [32]

2014

(Canada)

Identify knowledge gaps, perceived barriers and enablers for practising IPV screening in the clinical orthopaedic setting.

Focus-group discussions

Orthopedic surgeons

n = 18

10+

Mauri et al. [53]

2015

(Italy)

Explore midwives’ knowledge and clinical experience of domestic violence among pregnant women, with particular emphasis on their perceptions of their professional role.

Semi-structured interviews

Midwives

n = 15

10+

McCall-Hosenfeld et al. [26]

2014

(USA)

Assess the opinions and practices of primary care physicians caring for rural women with regard to IPV identification, the scope and severity of IPV as a health problem, how PCPs respond to IPV in their practices, and barriers to optimized IPV care in their communities.

Semi-structured interviews

Internists, family practitioners and obstetrician-gynecologists

n = 19

10+

Papadakaki et al. [52]

2014

(Greece)

Explore the perceptions and practices of general practitioners (GPs) regarding the identification and management of victimized patients in primary care settings.

Focus-group interviews

General Practitioners

n = 18

10+

Ramachandran et al. [27]

2013

(USA)

Describe screening practices and factors that influence this process among health care workers in sexual and reproductive health clinics in Baltimore City.

In-depth interviews

Healthcare providers (nurses)

n = 14

N/S

Usta et al. [55]

2014

(Lebanon)

Explore physicians’ attitudes about responding to DV, their perception of the physician’s role, and the factors that influence their response.

Semi-structured interviews

Health providers/professionals

n = 67

> 5

Baird et al. [35]

2013

(UK)

Evaluate the degree to which practice changes identified in the 2004/ 2005 evaluation of the Bristol Pregnancy Domestic Violence Programme (BPDVP) for routine enquiry for domestic abuse have been maintained.

Focus-group interviews

Midwives

n = 11

10+

Colombini et al. [56]

2013

(Malaysia)

Explore the views and attitudes of health providers towards IPV and abused women, and to investigate their impact on the provision and the quality of OSCC integrated services in Malaysia.

In-depth interviews

Health providers/professionals

n = 54

N/S

Iverson et al. [25]

2013

(USA)

Provides an initial qualitative assessment of VHA primary care providers’ perspectives regarding IPV screening practices.

In-depth semi-structured interviews

Health providers/professionals

n = 1

10+

Shamu et al. [62]

2013

(Zimbabwe)

Explore perceptions and experiences of nurse midwives working in Zimbabwe’s public maternity services regarding IPV among pregnant women, including possible responses in the clinic setting.

In-depth interviews, focus-group discussion and observation

Midwives

n = 6

N/S

Sprague et al. [34]

2013

(Canada)

Explore perceived barriers to IPV screening in the orthopaedic fracture clinic and by identifying potential facilitators for addressing these barriers among orthopaedic surgeons and surgical trainees (senior and junior orthopaedic residents).

Focus-group discussions

Orthopedic surgeons and strainees (senior and junior orthopedic residents).

n = 20

(mean 10)

10+

Beynon et al. [31]

2012

(Canada)

Explore physicians’ and nurses’ experiences, both professional and personal, when asking about IPV; determine the variations by discipline; and identify implications for practice, workplace policy and curriculum development.

Open ended survey

Physicians and nurses

n = 769

N/S

Efe-Taskin et al. [61]

2012

(Turkey)

Delineate the factors that prevent the adequate provision of nursing services to women subjected to domestic violence.

In-depth interviews

Nurses

n = 30

< 5

Finnbogadottir et al. [39]

2012

(Sweden)

Explore midwives’ awareness of and clinical experience regarding domestic violence among pregnant women in southern Sweden.

Focus-group discussions

Midwives

n = 16

10+

Guruge [59]

2012

(Sri Lanka)

Explore the research questions: (1) What are nurses’ perceptions of their role in caring for women experiencing IPV in the Sri Lankan context; (2) What are the barriers nurses face in providing appropriate care to women living with IPV in the Sri Lankan context?

Open-ended, unstructured interviews

Nurses

n = 30

10+

Yeung et al. [38]

2012

(UK)

Explore the perceptions and experiences of general practitioners (GPs) and practice nurses on addressing domestic violence before and after participation in a domestic violence training and support programme.

Semi-structured interviews

Health providers/professionals

n = 17

> 5