Dataset Information

Voluntary, temporary, out-of-home firearm storage: A qualitative study of stakeholder views.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Reducing firearm access during times of risk is a key component of suicide prevention, including the person at risk voluntarily, temporarily storing firearms outside the home. However, this approach relies on the participation of storage providers (ranges/retailers and law enforcement agencies (LEAs)). Our objective was to describe stakeholders' views and experiences surrounding voluntary, temporary out-of-home firearm storage for suicide prevention.

Method

We conducted individual interviews with (1) firearm ranges/retailers; (2) LEAs (in Colorado or Washington State); and (3) state/national organizations involved in policy development or enactment; public health; or firearm rights. Transcripts were analyzed using a team-based mixed inductive-deductive approach.

Results

Across 100 interviews (October-May 2021), potential storage providers were supportive of voluntary storage programs, often reporting a desire to help their customers and community. However, potential storage suppliers cited civil liability, regulatory, and legal concerns associated with storing and/or returning firearms (to people who had previously expressed suicide risk). Stakeholders offered suggested strategies meant to address liability and increase storage accessibility.

Conclusions

Understanding stakeholder views supports the development of acceptable, feasible programs for out-of-home firearm storage during times of suicide risk. Clarification of existing regulations or creation of new policies is necessary to address potential providers' concerns.

SUBMITTER: Betz ME

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9378345 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Voluntary, temporary, out-of-home firearm storage: A qualitative study of stakeholder views.

Betz Marian E ME Rooney Lauren A LA Barnard Leslie M LM Siry-Bove Bonnie J BJ Brandspigel Sara S McCarthy Megan M Simeon Kate K Meador Lauren L Rivara Frederick P FP Rowhani-Rahbar Ali A Knoepke Christopher E CE

Suicide & life-threatening behavior 20220228 4

<h4>Background</h4>Reducing firearm access during times of risk is a key component of suicide prevention, including the person at risk voluntarily, temporarily storing firearms outside the home. However, this approach relies on the participation of storage providers (ranges/retailers and law enforcement agencies (LEAs)). Our objective was to describe stakeholders' views and experiences surrounding voluntary, temporary out-of-home firearm storage for suicide prevention.<h4>Method</h4>We conducted ...[more]

PMID: 35224749

Similar Datasets

Project description:OBJECTIVES:Innovations resulting from research have both national and global impact, so selecting the most promising research studies to fund is crucial. Peer review of research funding applications is part of the selection process, and requires considerable resources. This study aimed to elicit stakeholder opinions about which factors contribute to and influence effective peer review of funding applications to the UK National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), and to identify possible minor improvements to current processes and any major changes or potential innovations to achieve a more efficient peer review process. DESIGN:Qualitative interviews with 30 stakeholders involved in the peer review process. PARTICIPANTS:Participants were drawn from three NIHR coordinating centres and represented four types of stakeholders: board members with responsibility for making funding decisions, applicants, external peer reviewers and NIHR staff. METHODS:All interviews were conducted by telephone apart from three that were face to face with NIHR staff. Data were analysed using a thematic template method. RESULTS:The responses from NIHR staff, board members and reviewers differed from those received from applicants. The first three groups focused on how well the process of peer review did or did not function. The applicants mentioned these points but in addition often reflected on how their personal application was assessed. Process improvements suggested included: developing a more proportionate review process; providing greater guidance, feedback, training, acknowledgement or incentives for peer reviewers; reducing the time commitment and amount of paperwork; and asking reviewers to comment on the importance, strengths and weaknesses of applications and flaws which are potentially 'fixable'. CONCLUSIONS:Overall, participants were supportive of the need for peer review in evaluating applications for research funding. This study revealed which parts of the process are working well and are valued, and barriers, difficulties and potential areas for improvement and development.

Project description:BackgroundClinical quality registries (CQRs) can likely improve quality in healthcare and research. However, studies indicate that effective use of CQRs is hindered by lack of engagement and interest among stakeholders, as well as factors related to organisational context, registry design and data quality. To fulfil the potential of CQRs, more knowledge on stakeholders' perceptions of the factors that will facilitate or hamper the development of CQRs is essential to the more appropriate targeting of registry implementation and the subsequent use of the data. The primary aim of this study was to examine factors that can potentially affect the development of a national CQR for interventional radiology in Norway from the perspective of stakeholders. Furthermore, we wanted to identify the intervention functions likely to enable CQR development. Only one such registry, located in Sweden, has been established. To provide a broader context for the Norwegian study, we also sought to investigate experiences with the development of this registry.MethodsA qualitative study of ten Norwegian radiologists and radiographers using focus groups was conducted, and an in-depth interview with the initiator of the Swedish registry was carried out. Questions were based on the Capability, Opportunity and Motivation for Behaviour Model and the Theoretical Domains Framework. The participants' responses were categorised into predefined themes using a deductive process of thematic analysis.ResultsKnowledge of the rationale used in establishing a CQR, beliefs about the beneficial consequences of a registry for quality improvement and research and an opportunity to learn from a well-developed registry were perceived by the participants as factors facilitating CQR development. The study further identified a range of development barriers related to environmental and resource factors (e.g., a lack of organisational support, time) and individuallevel factors (e.g., role boundaries, resistance to change), as well as several intervention functions likely to be appropriate in targeting these barriers.ConclusionThis study provides a deeper understanding of factors that may be involved in the behaviour of stakeholders regarding the development of a CQR. The findings may assist in designing, implementing and evaluating a methodologically rigorous CQR intervention.

Project description:ObjectivesTo explore stakeholders' understanding of novel integrated approaches to enhancing care in care homes (a care home 'vanguard') and identify priorities for evaluation.DesignA qualitative study, using semistructured interviews with commissioners and service providers to/within care homes, and third sector organisations with thematic analysis.SettingA Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) area in England.ParticipantsThirty interviewees from care homes, the National Health Service (NHS; England) and local authority, third sector (10 care home managers, 5 general practitioners, 4 CCG employees, 4 local authority employees, 1 national (NHS England) vanguard lead, 2 specialist nurses, 2 geriatricians, 1 third sector and 1 health manager).ResultsFour higher level themes emerged from the data: understanding of proposed changes, communication, evaluation of outcome measures of success, and trust and complexity. The vision for the new programme was shared by stakeholders, with importance attached to equitable access to high-quality care. Support for the programme was described as being 'the right thing to do', inferring a moral imperative. However, the practical implications of key aspects, such as integrated working, were not clearly understood and the programme was perceived by some as being imposed, top down, from the health service. Barriers and facilitators to change were identified across themes of communication, outcomes, trust and complexity. Importance was attached to the measurement of intangible aspects of success, such as collaboration. Interviewees understood that outcome-based commissioning was one element of the new programme, but discussion of their aspirations and practices revealed values and beliefs more compatible with a system based on trust.ConclusionsInnovation in service delivery requires organisations to adopt common priorities and share responsibility for success. The vanguard programme is working to ensure health and local authorities have this commitment, but engaging care homes that may feel isolated from the welfare system needs sustained dialogue over the longer term. Evaluation of the programme needs to measure what is important to stakeholders, and not focus too closely on resource consumption.

Dataset Information

Voluntary, temporary, out-of-home firearm storage: A qualitative study of stakeholder views.

Background

Method

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Voluntary, temporary, out-of-home firearm storage: A qualitative study of stakeholder views.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets