Background

Violent injury is the second most common cause of death among 15- to 24-year olds in the US. Up to 58% of violently injured youth return to the hospital with a second violent injury. Hospital-based violence intervention programs (HVIPs) have been shown to reduce injury recidivism through intensive case management. However, no validated guidelines for risk assessment strategies in the HVIP setting have been reported. We aimed to use qualitative methods to investigate the key components of risk assessments employed by HVIP case managers and to propose a risk assessment model based on this qualitative analysis.

Materials and methods

An established academic hospital-affiliated HVIP served as the nexus for this research. Thematic saturation was reached with 11 semi-structured interviews and two focus groups conducted with HVIP case managers and key informants identified through snowball sampling. Interactions were analyzed by a four-member team using Nvivo 10, employing the constant comparison method. Risk factors identified were used to create a set of models presented in two follow-up HVIP case managers and leadership focus groups.

Results

Eighteen key themes within seven domains (environment, identity, mental health, behavior, conflict, indicators of lower risk, and case management) and 141 potential risk factors for use in the risk assessment framework were identified. The most salient factors were incorporated into eight models that were presented to the HVIP case managers. A 29-item algorithmic structured professional judgment model was chosen.

Conclusions

We identified four tiers of risk factors for violent reinjury that were incorporated into a proposed risk assessment instrument, VRRAI.

Statement of purpose

Intentional violent injury is a leading cause of disability and death among young adults in the United States. Hospital-based violence intervention programs (HVIPs), which strive to prevent re-injury through intensive case management, have emerged as a successful and cost-effective strategy to address this issue. Despite the importance of strong therapeutic relationships between clients and their case managers, specific case manager behaviors and attributes that drive the formation of these relationships have not been elucidated.

Methods

A qualitative analysis with a modified grounded theory approach was conducted to gain insight into what clients perceive to be crucial to the formation of a strong client-case manager relationship. Twenty-four semi-structured interviews were conducted with prior clients of our hospital's HVIP. The interviews were analyzed using constant comparison method for recurrent themes.

Results

Several key themes emerged from the interviews. Clients emphasized that their case managers must: 1) understand and relate to their sociocultural contexts, 2) navigate the initial in-hospital meeting to successfully create connection, 3) exhibit true compassion and care, 4) serve as role models, 5) act as portals of opportunity, and 6) engender mutual respect and pride.

Conclusions

This study identifies key behaviors of case managers that facilitate the formation of strong therapeutic relationships at the different stages of client recovery. This study's findings emphasize the importance of case managers being culturally aligned with and embedded in their clients' communities. This work can provide a roadmap for case managers to form optimally effective relationships with clients.