Search

Background: Firearm injuries are the leading cause of death among children aged 0 to 17 years in the United States., Objective: To examine the factors associated with recurrent firearm injury among children who presented with acute (index) nonfatal firearm injury in the St. Louis region., Design: Multicenter, observational, cohort study., Setting: 2 adult and 2 pediatric level I trauma hospitals in St. Louis, Missouri., Participants: Pediatric patients aged 0 to 17 years presenting with an index firearm injury between 2010 and 2019., Measurements: From the St. Louis Region-Wide Hospital-Based Violence Intervention Program Data Repository, we collected data on firearm-injured patient demographics, hospital and diagnostic information, health insurance status, and mortality. The Social Vulnerability Index was used to characterize the social vulnerability of the census tracts of patients' residences. Analysis included descriptive statistics and time-to-event analyses estimating the cumulative incidence of experiencing a recurrent firearm injury., Results: During the 10-year study period, 1340 children presented with an index firearm injury. Most patients were Black (87%), non-Hispanic (99%), male (84%), and between the ages of 15 and 17 years (67%). The estimated risk for firearm reinjury was 6% at 1 year and 14% at 5 years after initial injury. Male children and those seen at an adult hospital were at increased risk for reinjury., Limitation: Our data set does not account for injuries occurring outside of the study period and for reinjuries presenting to nonstudy hospitals., Conclusion: Children who experience an initial firearm injury are at high risk for experiencing a recurrent firearm injury. Interventions are needed to reduce reinjury and address inequities in the demographic and clinical profiles within this cohort of children., Primary Funding Source: National Institutes of Health., Competing Interests: Disclosures: Disclosures can be viewed at www.acponline.org/authors/icmje/ConflictOfInterestForms.do?msNum=M24-0430.

Importance: Despite the prevalence of posttraumatic stress symptoms after firearm injury, little is known about how firearm injury survivors connect with mental health services., Objective: To determine facilitators and barriers to mental health care engagement among firearm injury survivors., Design, Setting, and Participants: A qualitative study of 1-on-1, semistructured interviews conducted within a community setting in Indianapolis, Indiana, between June 2021 and January 2022. Participants were recruited via community partners and snowball sampling. Participants who survived an intentional firearm injury, were shot within Indianapolis, were aged 13 years or older, and were English speaking were eligible. Participants were asked to discuss their lives after firearm injury, the emotional consequences of their injury, and their utilization patterns of mental health services. Data were analyzed from August 2022 to June 2023., Main Outcomes and Measures: Survivors' lived experience after firearm injury, sources of emotional support, mental health utilization, and their desired engagement with mental health care after firearm injury., Results: A total of 18 participants (17 were Black [94%], 16 were male [89%], and 14 were aged between 13 and 24 years [77%]) who survived a firearm injury were interviewed. Survivors described family members, friends, and informal networks as their main source of emotional support. Barriers to mental health care utilization were perceived as a lack of benefit to services, distrust in practitioners, and fear of stigma. Credible messengers served as facilitators to mental health care. Survivors also described the emotional impact their shooting had on their families, particularly mothers, partners, and children., Conclusions and Relevance: In this study of survivors of firearm injury, findings illustrated the consequences of stigma and fear when seeking mental health care, inadequate trusted resources, and the need for awareness of and access to mental health resources for family members and communities most impacted by firearm injury. Future studies should evaluate whether community capacity building, digital health delivery, and trauma-informed public health campaigns could overcome these barriers to mitigate the emotional trauma of firearm injuries to reduce health disparities and prevent future firearm violence.

This qualitative study examines how youth and adult members of 4-H Shooting Sports clubs perceive firearm injury risk and risk reduction, and the applicability of a bystander intervention (BI) risk reduction framework in this community. Semistructured interviews were conducted with 11 youth and 13 adult members of 4-H Shooting Sports clubs across nine US states from March to December of 2021 until thematic saturation was reached. Deductive and inductive thematic qualitative analyses were performed. Six overarching themes emerged: (1) The tendency to view firearm injury as predominantly unintentional in nature; (2) Acknowledgment of a wide array of risks for firearm injury; (3) Perceived barriers to bystander action to prevent firearm injury including knowledge, confidence, and consequences of action; (4) Facilitators of bystander action including a sense of civic responsibility; (5) Direct and indirect strategies to address potential risks for firearm injury; and (6) Belief that BI skills training would be useful for 4-H Shooting Sports. Findings lay the groundwork for applying BI skills training as an approach to firearm injury prevention in 4-H Shooting Sports, similar to how BI has been applied to other types of injury (i.e., sexual assault). 4-H Shooting Sports club members' sense of civic responsibility is a key facilitator. Prevention efforts should attend to the broad array of ways in which firearm injury occurs, including suicide, mass shootings, homicide, and intimate partner violence, as well as unintentional injury., (© 2023 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: Firearm injuries are a public health crisis in the United States., Objective: To examine the incidence and factors associated with recurrent firearm injuries and death among patients presenting with an acute (index), nonfatal firearm injury., Design: Multicenter, observational, cohort study., Setting: Four adult and pediatric level I trauma hospitals in St. Louis, Missouri, 2010 to 2019., Participants: Consecutive adult and pediatric patients ( n = 9553) presenting to a participating hospital with a nonfatal acute firearm injury., Measurements: Data on firearm-injured patient demographics, hospital and diagnostic information, health insurance status, and death were collected from the St. Louis Region-Wide Hospital-Based Violence Intervention Program Data Repository. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Social Vulnerability Index was used to characterize the social vulnerability of the census tracts of patients' residences. Analysis included descriptive statistics and time-to-event analyses estimating the probability of experiencing a recurrent firearm injury., Results: We identified 10 293 acutely firearm-injured patients of whom 9553 survived the injury and comprised the analytic sample. Over a median follow-up of 3.5 years (IQR, 1.5 to 6.4 years), 1155 patients experienced a recurrent firearm injury including 5 firearm suicides and 149 fatal firearm injuries. Persons experiencing recurrent firearm injury were young (25.3 ± 9.5 years), predominantly male (93%), Black (96%), and uninsured (50%), and resided in high social vulnerability regions (65%). The estimated risk for firearm reinjury was 7% at 1 year and 17% at 8 years., Limitations: Limited data on comorbidities and patient-level social determinants of health. Inability to account for recurrent injuries presenting to nonstudy hospitals., Conclusion: Recurrent injury and death are frequent among survivors of firearm injury, particularly among patients from socially vulnerable areas. Our findings highlight the need for interventions to prevent recurrence., Primary Funding Source: Emergency Medicine Foundation-AFFIRM and Missouri Foundation for Health., Competing Interests: Disclosures: Disclosures can be viewed at www.acponline.org/authors/icmje/ConflictOfInterestForms.do?msNum=M23-0069.

Firearm-related injury and death is a serious public health issue in the U.S. As more Americans consume news and media online, there is growing interest in using these channels to prevent firearm-related harms. Understanding the firearm-related narratives to which consumers are exposed is foundational to this work. This research used the browsing behavior of a representative sample of American adults to identify seven firearm-related content "ecosystems" (defined as naturally occurring networks of channels watched by the same users) on YouTube; we then described the demographics and internet search patterns of users affiliated with each ecosystem. Over the 9-month study period, 72,205 panelists had 16,803,075 person-video encounters with 7,274,093 videos. Among these, 282,419 were related to firearms. Using fast greedy clustering, we partitioned users and channel interactions into seven distinct channel-based content ecosystems that reached more than 1/1000 YouTube users per day. These ecosystems were diverse in reach, users, and content (e.g., guns for self-protection, guns for fun). On average, 0.5% of panelists performed a firearm-related internet search on a given day. The vast majority of searches were related to mass shootings or police-involved shootings (e.g., "active shooter"), and virtually none were about more common firearm harm such as suicide. Searches for firearm safety information were most common among panelists affiliated with the "Hunting & Fishing" and "Guns & Gear" ecosystems, which were watched primarily by older, white men. These findings identify an opportunity for analyzing firearm-related narratives and tailoring firearm safety messaging for users affiliated with specific online content ecosystems., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Megan L. Ranney is a Senior Strategic Advisor (volunteer) for AFFIRM at the Aspen Institute, and serves on the Board of Directors for the Nonviolence Institute in Providence, RI. Frederica R. Conrey is employed by Harmony Labs and Rory Smith was employed by Harmony Labs when this research was conducted., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The medical community recognizes that firearm injury is a public health problem. Yet we lack both the tools for and the implementation of evidence-based firearm injury screening and counseling techniques. One reason for these deficits is the lack of clinical training related to engaging patients in firearm injury risk reduction. In this issue, Rickert et al describe a pre-post evaluation of a 2-part firearm injury prevention training curriculum for first-year medical residents at a single academic medical center. Their manuscript serves an important, but still preliminary, step forward for the field of postgraduate medical education on firearm injury and its prevention. Important elements of this project and paper consist of the inclusion of multiple medical disciplines and the use of standardized patients to evaluate participants' learning. This project also points to the need for further growth. We must commit to consistently and conscientiously framing injuries from guns not as "gun violence" but rather as "firearm injuries" to ensure that they are considered squarely in both the public health space and the clinical space. An ideal curriculum would also highlight the importance of trauma-informed care, cultural competency, and antiracist medical practice while countering implicit biases (e.g., toward gun owners, victims of firearm violence, perpetrators of violence). It should address barriers, as well as facilitators, to change. And most importantly, future educational work must evaluate the effect of these trainings on actual clinical practice-and, even better, the efficacy of education in changing behavior and patient-level outcomes., (Copyright © 2022 by the Association of American Medical Colleges.)

Purpose: Firearm injury is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in the United States. However, many medical professionals currently receive minimal or no education on firearm injury or its prevention. The authors sought to convene a diverse group of national experts in firearm injury epidemiology, injury prevention, and medical education to develop consensus on priorities to inform the creation of learning objectives and curricula for firearm injury education for medical professionals., Method: In 2019, the authors convened an advisory group that was geographically, demographically, and professionally diverse, composed of 33 clinicians, researchers, and educators from across the United States. They used the nominal group technique to achieve consensus on priorities for health professions education on firearm injury. The process involved an initial idea-generating phase, followed by a round-robin sharing of ideas and further idea generation, facilitated discussion and clarification, and the ranking of ideas to generate a prioritized list., Results: This report provides the first national consensus guidelines on firearm injury education for medical professionals. These priorities include a set of crosscutting, basic, and advanced learning objectives applicable to all contexts of firearm injury and all medical disciplines, specialties, and levels of training. They focus on 7 contextual categories that had previously been identified in the literature: 1 category of general priorities applicable to all contexts and 6 categories of specific contexts, including intimate partner violence, mass violence, officer-involved shootings, peer (nonpartner) violence, suicide, and unintentional injury., Conclusions: Robust, data- and consensus-driven priorities for health professions education on firearm injury create a pathway to clinician competence and self-efficacy. With an improved foundation for curriculum development and educational program-building, clinicians will be better informed to engage in a host of firearm injury prevention initiatives both at the bedside and in their communities., Competing Interests: Other disclosures: Several authors have received consultant payments from organizations to develop firearm injury risk reduction training programs or to serve as firearms instructors. The authors have no potential conflicts of interest to disclose.

Nonfatal firearm assault incidents are more prevalent than gun homicides, however, little is understood about nonfatal firearm assault incidents due to a lack of accurate data in the United States. This is a descriptive study of all nonfatal firearm assault incidents identified through police and clinical records from 2007 to 2016 in Indianapolis, Indiana. Records were linked at the incident level to demonstrate the overlap and non-overlap of nonfatal firearm assault incidents in police and clinical records and describe differences in demographic characteristics of the victims. Incidents were matched within a 24-h time window of the recorded date of the police incident. Data were analyzed in fall 2020. There were 3797 nonfatal firearm assault incidents identified in police reports and 3131 clinical encounters with an ICD 9/10 diagnosis-based nonfatal firearm-related injury. 62% (n = 2366) of nonfatal firearm assault incidents matched within 24 h to a clinical encounter, 81% (n = 1905) had a firearm related ICD code: 40% (n = 947) were coded as a firearm-related assault, 32% (n = 754) were coded as a firearm-related accident; and 8.6% (n = 198) were coded as undetermined, self-inflicted or law enforcement firearm-related. The other 20% (n = 461) did not have an ICD firearm related diagnosis code. Results indicate most nonfatal firearm assault incidents overlap between police and clinical records systems, however, discrepancies between the systems exist. These findings also demonstrate an undercounting of nonfatal firearm assault incidents when relying on clinical data systems alone and more efforts are needed to link administrative police and clinical data in the study of nonfatal firearm assaults., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Firearm injury and death is increasingly prevalent in the United States. Emergency physicians (EP) may have a unique role in firearm injury prevention. The aim of this study was to describe EPs' beliefs, attitudes, practices, and barriers to identifying risk of and counseling on firearm injury prevention with patients. A secondary aim was assessment of perceived personal vulnerability to firearm injury while working in the emergency department (ED)., Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of a national convenience sample of EPs, using questions adapted from the American College of Surgeons' Committee on Trauma 2017 survey of surgeons. Descriptive statistics and chi-square tests were calculated as appropriate., Results: A total of 1901 surveys were completed by EPs from across the United States. Among respondents, 42.9% had a firearm at home, and 56.0% had received firearm safety training. Although 51.4% of physicians in our sample were comfortable discussing firearm access with their high-risk patients, more than 70% agreed or strongly agreed that they wanted training on procedures to follow when they identify that a patient is at high risk of firearm injury. Respondents reported a variety of current practices regarding screening, counseling, and resource use for patients at high risk of firearm injury; the highest awareness and self-reported screening and counseling on firearm safety was with patients with suicidal ideation. Although 92.3% of EPs reported concerns about personal safety associated with firearms in the ED, 48.1% reported that there was either no protocol for dealing with a firearm in the ED, or if there was a protocol, they were not aware of it. Differences in demographics, knowledge, attitudes, and behavior were observed between respondents with a firearm in the home, and those without a firearm in the home., Conclusions: Among respondents to this national survey of a convenience sample of EPs, approximately 40% had a firearm at home. The majority reported wanting increased education and training to identify and counsel ED patients at high risk for firearm injury. Improved guidance on personal safety regarding firearms in the ED is also needed.

Background: The incidence of firearm injury and death in the United States is increasing. Although the health care-related effect of firearm injury is estimated to be high, existing data are largely cross-sectional, do not include data on preinjury and postinjury health care visits and related costs, and use hospital charges rather than actual monetary payments., Objective: To compare actual health care costs (that is, actual monetary payments) and utilizations within the 6 months before and after an incident (index) firearm injury., Design: Before-after study., Setting: Blue Cross Blue Shield plans of Illinois, Texas, Oklahoma, New Mexico, and Montana., Participants: Plan members continuously enrolled for at least 12 months before and after an index firearm injury sustained between 1 January 2015 and 31 December 2017., Measurements: Eligible costs, out-of-pocket costs, and firearm injury-related International Classification of Diseases, Ninth or 10th Revision, codes., Results: Total initial (emergency department [ED]) health care costs for persons with index firearm injuries who were discharged from the ED were $8 158 786 ($5686 per member). Total initial (hospital admission) costs for persons with index firearm injuries who required hospitalization were $41 255 916 ($70 644 per member). Compared with the 6 months before the index firearm injury, in the 6 months after, per-member costs increased by 347% (from $3984 to $17 806 per member) for those discharged from the ED and 2138% (from $4118 to $92 151 per member) for those who were hospitalized. The number of claims increased by 187% for patients discharged from the ED and 608% for those who were hospitalized., Limitation: Firearm injury intent was not specified because of misclassification concerns., Conclusion: In the 6 months after a firearm injury, patient-level health care visits and costs increased by 3 to 20 times compared with the 6 months prior. The burden of firearm injury on the health care system is large and quantifiable., Primary Funding Source: None.

Firearm injury in the United States is a public health crisis in which physicians are uniquely situated to intervene. However, their ability to mitigate harm is limited by a complex array of laws and regulations that shape their role in firearm injury prevention. This piece uses four clinical scenarios to illustrate how these laws and regulations impact physician practice, including patient counseling, injury reporting, and the use of court orders and involuntary holds. Unintended consequences on clinical practice of laws intended to reduce firearm injury are also discussed. Lessons drawn from these cases suggest that physicians require more nuanced education on this topic, and that policymakers should consult front-line healthcare providers when designing firearm policies.

Firearm injuries are the second-leading cause of death for US children and adolescents (ages 1-18). This analysis quantified the federal dollars granted to research for the leading US causes of death for this age group in 2008-17. Several federal data sources were queried. On average, in the study period, $88 million per year was granted to research motor vehicle crashes, the leading cause of death in this age group. Cancer, the third-leading cause of mortality, received $335 million per year. In contrast, $12 million-only thirty-two grants, averaging $597 in research dollars per death-went to firearm injury prevention research among children and adolescents. According to a regression analysis, funding for pediatric firearm injury prevention was only 3.3 percent of what would be predicted by mortality burden, and that level of funding resulted in fewer scientific articles than predicted. A thirtyfold increase in firearm injury research funding focused on this age group, or at least $37 million per year, is needed for research funding to be commensurate with the mortality burden.

The long-term consequences of exposure to firearm injury-including suicide, assault, and mass shootings-on children's mental and physical health is unknown. Using PRISMA-ScR guidelines, we conducted a scoping review of four databases (PubMed, Scopus, PsychINFO, and CJ abstract) between January 1, 1985 and April 2, 2018 for articles describing long-term outcomes of child or adolescent firearm injury exposure (n = 3582). Among included studies (n = 31), most used retrospective cohorts or cross-sectional studies to describe the correlation between firearm injury and post-traumatic stress. A disproportionate number of studies examined the effect of mass shootings, although few of these studies were conducted in the United States and none described the impact of social media. Despite methodologic limitations, youth firearm injury exposure is clearly linked to high rates of post-traumatic stress symptoms and high rates of future injury. Evidence is lacking on best practices for prevention of mental health and behavioral sequelae among youth exposed to firearm injury. Future research should use rigorous methods to identify prevalence, correlates, and intervention strategies for these at-risk youth.

A recommended component of suicide prevention is encouraging at-risk individuals to voluntarily and temporarily reduce access to firearms and other lethal methods. Yet delivering counseling on the topic can be difficult, given the political sensitivity of firearm discussions. To support such counseling, we sought to identify recommended framing and content of messages about reducing firearm access for suicide prevention. Through qualitative interviews with firearm owners and enthusiasts, we identified key points for use in framing (identity as a gun owner, trust, voluntary and temporary storage, and context and motivation) and specific content (preference for "firearm" over "gun," and legal issues such as background checks for transfers). These findings build on prior work and should enhance efforts to develop and deliver effective, acceptable counseling and-ultimately-prevent firearm suicide., (© 2019 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Study Objective: To identify critical emergency medicine-focused firearm injury research questions and develop an evidence-based research agenda., Methods: National content experts were recruited to a technical advisory group for the American College of Emergency Physicians Research Committee. Nominal group technique was used to identify research questions by consensus. The technical advisory group decided to focus on 5 widely accepted categorizations of firearm injury. Subgroups conducted literature reviews on each topic and developed preliminary lists of emergency medicine-relevant research questions. In-person meetings and conference calls were held to iteratively refine the extensive list of research questions, following nominal group technique guidelines. Feedback from external stakeholders was reviewed and integrated., Results: Fifty-nine final emergency medicine-relevant research questions were identified, including questions that cut across all firearm injury topics and questions specific to self-directed violence (suicide and attempted suicide), intimate partner violence, peer (nonpartner) violence, mass violence, and unintentional ("accidental") injury. Some questions could be addressed through research conducted in emergency departments; others would require work in other settings., Conclusion: The technical advisory group identified key emergency medicine-relevant firearm injury research questions. Emergency medicine-specific data are limited for most of these questions. Funders and researchers should consider increasing their attention to firearm injury prevention and control, particularly to the questions identified here and in other recently developed research agendas., (Copyright © 2016 American College of Emergency Physicians. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Physicians have unique opportunities to help prevent firearm violence. Concern has developed that federal and state laws or regulations prohibit physicians from asking or counseling patients about firearms and disclosing patient information about firearms to others, even when threats to health and safety may be involved. This is not the case. In this article, the authors explain the statutes in question, emphasizing that physicians may ask about firearms (with rare exceptions), may counsel about firearms as they do about other health matters, and may disclose information to third parties when necessary. The authors then review circumstances under which questions about firearms might be most appropriate if they are not asked routinely. Such circumstances include instances when the patient provides information or exhibits behavior suggesting an acutely increased risk for violence, whether to himself or others, or when the patient possesses other individual-level risk factors for violence, such as alcohol abuse. The article summarizes the literature on current physician practices in asking and counseling about firearms, which are done far less commonly than recommended. Barriers to engaging in those practices, the effectiveness of clinical efforts to prevent firearm-related injuries, and what patients think about such efforts and physicians who engage in them are discussed. Proceeding from the limited available evidence, the authors make specific recommendations on how physicians might counsel their patients to reduce their risk for firearm-related death or serious injury. Finally, the authors review the circumstances under which disclosure of patient information about firearms to third parties is supported by regulations implementing the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act.

Firearm injury is a leading cause of injury-related morbidity and mortality in the United States. We sought to systematically identify and summarize existing literature on clinical firearm injury prevention screening and interventions. We conducted a systematic search of PubMed, Web of Science, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), PsycInfo, and ClinicalTrials.gov for English-language original research (published 1992-2014) on clinical screening methods, patient-level firearm interventions, or patient/provider attitudes on the same. Unrelated studies were excluded through title, abstract, and full-text review, and the remaining articles underwent data abstraction and quality scoring. Of a total of 3,260 unique titles identified, 72 were included in the final review. Fifty-three articles examined clinician attitudes/practice patterns; prior training, experience, and expectations correlated with clinicians' regularity of firearm screening. Twelve articles assessed patient interventions, of which 6 were randomized controlled trials. Seven articles described patient attitudes; all were of low methodological quality. According to these articles, providers rarely screen or counsel their patients-even high-risk patients-about firearm safety. Health-care-based interventions may increase rates of safe storage of firearms for pediatric patients, suicidal patients, and other high-risk groups. Some studies show that training clinicians can increase rates of effective firearm safety screening and counseling. Patients and families are, for the most part, accepting of such screening and counseling. However, the current literature is, by and large, not high quality. Rigorous, large-scale, adequately funded studies are needed., (© The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)