142nd APHA Annual Meeting and Exposition

Annual Meeting Recordings are now available for purchase

303630
Primary prevention of violence in high school pupils in Scotland: Evaluation of the Medics Against Violence programme

142nd APHA Annual Meeting and Exposition (November 15 - November 19, 2014): http://www.apha.org/events-and-meetings/annual
Sunday, November 16, 2014

Anna Gavine, BMSc (Hons), MBChB, PhD , School of Medicine, University of St. Andrews, St. Andrews, United Kingdom
Damien Williams, BSc(Hons), PhD, FRSPH, AFHEA, MBPsS , School of Medicine, University of St Andrews, St Andrews, Scotland
Dr Christine Goodall, BDS (Hons), BSc (Hons), FHEA, FDS (OS) RCPSGlasg, Hon MFPH, PhD , Medical School, College of MVLS, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom
Prof Peter D. Donnelly, MD MPH MBA FRCP FFPH , Professor of Public Health Medicine, University of St Andrews, St Andrews, Fife, Scotland, United Kingdom

Background.

Medics Against Violence (MAV) is a primary prevention programme delivered voluntarily by healthcare professionals to high-school pupils during a single session. MAV adopts an educational approach which aims to change attitudes towards violence in order to reduce perpetration and victimisation of violence.

Methods.

A mixed-methods approach was adopted to conduct outcome and process evaluations. The outcome evaluation used validated questionnaires in four participating schools to examine change in attitudes towards violence and empathy from baseline, immediately post-intervention and at 3-month follow-up. The process evaluation consisted of focus groups with school pupils, and open-ended questionnaires and semi-structured interviews with MAV volunteers to explore experiences of MAV and areas for improvement.

Results.

There was a small but significant reduction in mean attitude toward violence score immediately post-intervention (p=.<001) however, this was not sustained at 3-months. In addition, there was no significant change in empathy scores from baseline. During the focus groups pupils generally expressed anti-violent attitudes, although they were more likely to support the use of reactive violence. The pupils particularly valued the use of real footage and the opportunity to talk to healthcare professionals. Volunteers felt more support was needed, and noted a number of areas for improvement.

Conclusions.

MAV had little effect on attitudes toward violence or empathy scores. This raises issues of how to capture the effects of MAV. Recommendations are made for further development in terms of establishing the target audience (i.e. potential victims or perpetrators), focusing on reactive violence, and addressing the psychological consequences of violence.

Learning Areas:

Conduct evaluation related to programs, research, and other areas of practice
Public health or related education
Public health or related research
Social and behavioral sciences

Learning Objectives:
Describe the mixed-methods evaluation strategy for the Medics Against Violence programme. Evaluate the effectiveness of the Medics Against Violence programme based on the outcome and process evaluations. Discuss the differentiation of reactive and proactive violence.

Keyword(s): Youth Violence, Evaluation

Presenting author's disclosure statement:

Qualified on the content I am responsible for because: I have been lead researcher and part of research teams evaluating violence prevention initiatives in school, community, and healthcare settings. My primary research focus is in the prevention of interpersonal (e.g. Intimate partner violence) and collective (e.g. youth gang violence) forms of violence.
Any relevant financial relationships? No

I agree to comply with the American Public Health Association Conflict of Interest and Commercial Support Guidelines, and to disclose to the participants any off-label or experimental uses of a commercial product or service discussed in my presentation.