Which statement about screening for substance use in IPV survivors is true?

Which statement about screening for substance use in IPV survivors is true?

• A. Use brief substance-use screens such as CAGE-AID or AUDIT-C
• B. Do not assess substance use
• C. Only assess substance use if there is obvious intoxication
• D. Rely on in-depth psychiatric interviews

Answer: (A)

A quick, validated screening approach is best for substance use in IPV survivors. Using brief tools like CAGE-AID or AUDIT-C allows you to screen efficiently in real-world settings, where time is limited and survivors may fear disclosure. These screens are designed to flag risky or problematic use reliably, giving you a standardized starting point for conversation, safety planning, and referrals. They work regardless of the patient’s presentation, and a positive screen prompts a more thorough assessment and appropriate support. Relying on only an in-depth psychiatric interview takes more time and may miss cases if the visit is brief or if the survivor isn’t ready to disclose. Waiting for obvious intoxication is unreliable because substance use often persists even when someone isn’t intoxicated, and it may be hidden or minimised. Skipping screening altogether misses an important opportunity to identify co-occurring issues that can affect safety and well-being. A brief, validated screen is the practical first step to integrated care for IPV and substance use.

A quick, validated screening approach is best for substance use in IPV survivors. Using brief tools like CAGE-AID or AUDIT-C allows you to screen efficiently in real-world settings, where time is limited and survivors may fear disclosure. These screens are designed to flag risky or problematic use reliably, giving you a standardized starting point for conversation, safety planning, and referrals. They work regardless of the patient’s presentation, and a positive screen prompts a more thorough assessment and appropriate support.

Relying on only an in-depth psychiatric interview takes more time and may miss cases if the visit is brief or if the survivor isn’t ready to disclose. Waiting for obvious intoxication is unreliable because substance use often persists even when someone isn’t intoxicated, and it may be hidden or minimised. Skipping screening altogether misses an important opportunity to identify co-occurring issues that can affect safety and well-being. A brief, validated screen is the practical first step to integrated care for IPV and substance use.