Skip to main content
. 2018 Feb 28;33(2):175–185. doi: 10.1093/her/cyy007

Table II.

After-visit patient report of provider communication

Outcome Communication skills (CS): pre-traininga(n = 383) versus post-training (n = 53) Standard training (ST): pre-traininga(n = 193) versus post-training (n = 50) CS versus ST
Pre % Post % Pre % Post % P-valueb
Safety card given during visit 8.7 71.7* 9.4 83.7* 0.148
Provider discussion
RC Birth control sabotage 11.5 14.9 6.3 17.0 0.681
Pregnancy coercion 8.8 3.9 3.7 13.3 0.1413
LARC 57.1 64.7 53.3 60.4 0.659
IPV Healthy versus unhealthy relationships 51.8 90.4* 48.9 78.0* 0.086
What you deserve in a relationship 10.7 14.0 6.5 21.3 0.346
How to help a friend who is in an unhealthy relationship by giving them the cardd 47.5 56.8 54.6 78.6 0.038
STI Safe ways to notify partner about infectione 34.2 50.0 47.1 50.0 >0.99
Resources
Domestic violence advocacy service 5.2 41.5* 10.9 46.0* 0.646
Rape crisis center 1.0 1.9 2.6 12.0 0.055c
National domestic violence hotline 7.6 32.1* 6.2 48.0* 0.099
Teen dating abuse hotline 1.3 5.7 5.7 24.0* 0.008
Did not receive any information about resources 77.3 45.3* 74.1 34.0* 0.646
Disclosed to provider n/a 9.8 n/a 12.3 0.739
*

P < 0.001; P < 0.05.

IPV, intimate partner violence; RC, reproductive coercion; STI, sexually transmitted infection.

a

Historical control groups received no training prior to collection of data; the historical control groups are comprised of the same clinics in the corresponding training group.

b

Chi-squared, unless otherwise stated.

c

Fisher’s exact test.

d

Denominator includes only participants who reported receiving a safety card from their provider.

e

Responses from patients who reported an STI diagnosis at clinic visit.