Qualitative study highlights the importance of trauma-informed care in enhancing patient engagement and addressing barriers.
Aims To explore patient experiences of trauma‐informed care in general health services delivered by community health nurses to individuals impacted by sexual assault or domestic violence, and the impact this care had on service engagement, overall patient experiences and barriers to care. Design A naturalistic inquiry approach was adopted. Methods Individual semi‐structured interviews were conducted with six adults impacted by sexual assault or family violence attending a multi‐agency metropolitan health service. Data were inductively analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. Results The significance of feeling safe and heard was interwoven across three main themes: Enhancing engagement with health care; Sharing the load: the experience of trauma‐informed nursing care; and The nurse's role in breaking down health system barriers and highlighting the value and impact of nurses implementing trauma‐informed care. Conclusions Patient experiences supported the need for and provided examples of operationalising trauma‐informed care in health care. Study findings suggest incorporation of trauma‐informed care into mainstream health service provision and training is recommended. Future research should expand understanding of the process and outcomes of implementing trauma‐informed care. Impact Trauma‐informed care can prevent re‐traumatisation and disrupt trauma impacts, but implementation in the health sector is poorly understood. This study demonstrates how trauma‐informed care can be translated to general health care settings to improve accessibility to care, enhance engagement and generate positive patient experiences. Reporting Method Aligns with the EQUATOR guidelines and COREQ reporting method. Patient or Public Contribution Six patients were involved as participants in the study; findings were shared with these patients before being included in the manuscript.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Roberts et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: