Frustrated demand for sterilization among low-income Latinas in El Paso, Texas

Healthcare Provider-Based Contraceptive Coercion: Understanding U.S. Patient Experiences and Describing Implications for Measurement

Despite growing concerns over coercion in contraceptive care, few studies have described its frequency and manifestations. Further, there is no established quantitative method of measuring this construct. We begin to fill this gap by detailing nuance in contraceptive coercion experiences and testing a novel measure: the Coercion in Contraceptive Care Checklist. In early 2023, we surveyed reproductive-aged people in the United States who were assigned female at birth about their contraceptive care. We describe the frequency of contraceptive coercion in our sample (N = 1197) and use open-ended descriptions to demonstrate nuances in these experiences. Finally, we debut our checklist and present psychometric testing results. Among people who had ever talked to a healthcare provider about contraception, over one in six participants (18.46%) reported experiencing coercion during their last contraceptive counseling, and over one in three (42.27%) reported it at some point in their lifetime. Being made to use or keep using birth control pills was the most common form of coercion reported by patients (14.62% lifetime frequency). Factor analysis supported the two-factor dimensionality of the Coercion in Contraceptive Care Checklist. Inter-item correlations were statistically significant (p < 0.001), providing evidence of reliability. The checklist was also related to measures of quality in family planning care (downward coercion: t[1194] = 7.54, p < 0.001; upward coercion: t[1194] = 14.76, p < 0.001) and discrimination in healthcare (downward coercion: t[1160] = -14.77, p < 0.001; upward coercion: t[1160] = -18.27, p < 0.001), providing evidence of construct validity. Findings provide critical information about the frequency and manifestations of contraceptive coercion. Psychometric tests reveal evidence of the Coercion in Contraceptive Care Checklist's validity, reliability, and dimensionality while also suggesting avenues for future testing and refinement.

Tubal Sterilization and Cervical Cancer Underscreening in the United States

Background: Tubal sterilization is more commonly utilized by racial/ethnic minority groups and has been implicated in underscreening for cervical cancer. The objective is to determine if prior tubal sterilization is a risk factor for cervical cancer underscreening. Methods: National Survey of Family Growth dataset from 2015 to 2019 used for analysis; data were weighted to represent the 72 million women in the U.S. population aged 22-49. Chi-square tests, Fisher exact tests, and logistic regression were used for analysis. The primary predictor variable was tubal sterilization which was categorized into no previous sterilization, sterilization completed <5 years ago, and sterilization completed ≥5 years ago. The outcome variable was underscreened versus not underscreened. Other predictor variables included age, household income as a percent of federal poverty level, previous live birth, primary care provider, and insurance status. Results: Prevalence of tubal sterilization completed 5 or more years ago was 12.5% and varied by most measured characteristics in univariate analyses. Approximately 8% of women were underscreened for cervical cancer. In multivariable analyses, women with a tubal sterilization 5 or more years ago had 2.64 times the odds (95% confidence interval = 1.75-4.00) of being underscreened for cervical cancer compared with women who did not have a tubal sterilization. Conclusions: Approximately 4.3 million women ages 22-49 in the United States are potentially underscreened for cervical cancer and women with previous tubal ligation ≥5 years ago are more likely to be underscreened. These results may inform the need for culturally sensitive public health messages informing people who have had these procedures about the need for continued screening.

A Decision Aid to Support Tubal Sterilization Decision-Making Among Pregnant Women: The MyDecision/MiDecisión Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Tubal sterilization is common, especially among individuals with low income. There is substantial misunderstanding about sterilization among those who have undergone the procedure, suggesting suboptimal decision-making about a method that permanently ends reproductive capacity.

Objective

To test the efficacy of a web-based decision aid for improving tubal sterilization decision quality.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This randomized clinical trial conducted between March 2020 and November 2023 included English- or Spanish-speaking pregnant cisgender women aged 21 to 45 years who had Medicaid insurance and were contemplating tubal sterilization after delivery. Participants were recruited from outpatient obstetric clinics in 3 US cities.

Intervention

Participants were randomized 1:1 to usual care (control arm) or to usual care plus a web-based decision aid (MyDecision/MiDecisión) (intervention arm). The aid includes written, audio, and video information about tubal sterilization procedures; an interactive table comparing contraceptive options; values-clarifying exercises; knowledge checks; and a summary report.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The co-primary outcomes were tubal sterilization knowledge and decisional conflict regarding the contraceptive decision. Knowledge was measured as the percentage of correct responses to 10 true-false items. Decisional conflict was measured using the low-literacy Decision Conflict Scale, with lower scores on a range from 0 to 100 indicating less conflict.

Results

Among the 350 participants, mean (SD) age was 29.7 (5.1) years. Compared with the usual care group, participants randomized to the decision aid had significantly higher tubal sterilization knowledge (mean [SD] proportion of questions answered correctly, 76.5% [16.9%] vs 55.6% [22.6%]; P < .001) and lower decisional conflict scores (mean [SD], 12.7 [16.6] vs 18.7 [20.8] points; P = .002). The greatest knowledge differences between the 2 groups were for items about permanence, with more participants in the intervention arm answering correctly that tubal sterilization is not easily reversible (90.1% vs 39.3%; odds ratio [OR], 14.2 [95% CI, 7.9-25.4]; P < .001) and that the tubes do not spontaneously "come untied" (86.6% vs 33.7%; OR, 13.0 [95% CI, 7.6-22.4]; P < .001).

Conclusions and Relevance

MyDecision/MiDecisión significantly improved tubal sterilization decision-making quality compared with usual care only. This scalable decision aid can be implemented into clinical practice to supplement practitioner counseling. These results are particularly important given the recent increase in demand for permanent contraception after the US Supreme Court decision overturning federal abortion protections.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04097717.

Strategies for obstetricians and gynecologists to advance reproductive autonomy in a post-Roe landscape

The monumental reversal of Roe vs Wade dramatically impacted the landscape of reproductive healthcare access in the United States. The decision most significantly affects communities that historically have been and continue to be marginalized by systemic racism, classism, and ableism within the medical system. To minimize the harm of restrictive policies that have proliferated since the Supreme Court overturned Roe, it is incumbent on obstetrician-gynecologists to modify practice patterns to meet the pressing reproductive health needs of their patients and communities. Change will require cross-discipline advocacy focused on advancing equity and supporting the framework of reproductive justice. Now, more than ever, obstetrician-gynecologists have a critical responsibility to implement new approaches to service delivery and education that will expand access to evidence-based, respectful, and person-centered family planning and early pregnancy care regardless of their practice location or subspecialty.

Reproductive Autonomy in Appalachia: An Investigation into Perceived Contraceptive Pressure

The reproductive autonomy of persons who can give birth can be impeded through forms of interpersonal violence and coercion. Moreover, macro-level factors (e.g., poverty, discrimination, community violence, legislative policies) may impede the reproductive autonomy of entire communities. This study investigates a form of violence we term perceived contraceptive pressure in Appalachia, an understudied region of the Eastern U.S., regarding reproductive health and decision-making. Through targeted Meta advertising, participants (N = 632) residing in Appalachian zip codes completed an online survey on reproductive health. The focus of this study was to investigate the prevalence of perceived contraceptive pressure, who was at increased risk of experiencing pressure, and the source(s) of perceived pressure. Binomial regressions were conducted on three different dependent variables: perceived pressure to be sterilized, perceived pressure to use birth control, and perceived pressure not to use birth control. Approximately half of all respondents (49.5%) reported experiencing at least one type of pressure targeting contraceptive decision-making. The most prevalent source of perceived pressure to use birth control was from the healthcare provider (67.4%), and the most prevalent source of perceived pressure not to use birth control was the respondent's partner (51.1%). Recommendations for providers serving clients in the Appalachian region include pursuing education regarding contraceptive pressure at the individual level and macro-level. In addition, Appalachian residents may benefit from educational programming on reproductive autonomy, healthy relationships, and how to navigate pressure in relationships.

U.S. physicians' perspectives on the complexities and challenges of permanent contraception provision

OBJECTIVES

Evidence shows many misconceptions exist around permanent contraception, and there are numerous barriers to accessing the procedure. This qualitative study explored physician perspectives regarding patients' informational and decision-support needs, the complexities and challenges of counseling and access, and how these factors may differ for people living on lower incomes.

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted 15 semistructured, telephone interviews with obstetrician-gynecologists in three geographic regions of the United States to explore their perspectives on providing permanent contraception counseling and care. We analyzed the interviews using content analysis.

RESULTS

Physicians discussed a tension between respecting individual reproductive autonomy and concern for future regret; they wanted to support patients' desire for permanent contraception but were frequently concerned patients did not have the information they needed or the foresight to make high-quality decisions. Physicians also identified barriers to counseling including lack of time, lack of continuity over the course of prenatal care, and baseline misinformation among patients. Physicians identified additional barriers in providing a postpartum procedure even after thedecision was made including lack of personnel and operating room availability. Finally, physicians felt that people living on lower incomes faced more challenges in access primarily due to the sterilization consent regulations required by Medicaid.

CONCLUSIONS

Physicians report numerous challenges surrounding permanent contraception provision and access. Strategies are needed to support physicians and patients to enhance high-quality, patient-centered sterilization decision making and ensure that patients are able to access a permanent contraceptive procedure when desired.

IMPLICATIONS

This qualitative study demonstrates the various challenges faced by physicians to support permanent contraception decision making. These challenges may limit patients' access to the care they desire. This study supports the need to transform care delivery models and improve the federal sterilization policy to ensure equitable patient-centered access to desired permanent contraception.

DISCLAIMER

Although the term permanent contraception has increasingly replaced the word sterilization in clinical settings, we use sterilization in some places throughout this paper as that was the standard terminology at the time the interviews were conducted and the language the interviewed physicians used.

Male or female sterilization - the decision making process: Counselling and regret

OBJECTIVE(S)

To analyze the decision-making process of both male and female sterilization in order to improve counselling and prevent regret after sterilization in the future.

STUDY DESIGN

An online questionnaire regarding sterilization (counselling, sources of information and regret) was promoted on Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn. A total of 1107 men and women who had undergone or considered sterilization in the Netherlands filled in the questionnaire.

RESULTS

A total of 88.9 % of the sterilized group and 67.4 % in the considered group responded that they felt well informed when they considered sterilization. However, less than half of the participants in both groups knew about all different sterilization methods. In both groups participants reported they consulted their partner the most when they considered sterilization. After sterilization 7.7 % reported having regret. Regret was reported more often when participants were sterilized ≤ 30 years. Most important reasons for regret reported by males were complications, pain, a new wish to conceive and divorce/remarriage. Most important reasons for regret reported by females were pain, complications, a new wish to conceive and menstrual symptoms. A total of 21.1 % in the sterilized and 38.0 % in the considered group responded they would have liked to use a decision aid when they considered sterilization.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings of this study provide insight in the decision-making process regarding sterilization. There is a lack of knowledge of different methods of sterilization and 7.7% regrets their sterilization afterwards. Furthermore, the results show an importance of developing a decision aid for couples considering sterilization.

Female permanent contraception trends and updates

Permanent contraception remains one of the most popular methods of contraception worldwide. This article has reviewed recent literature related to demographic characteristics of users, prevalence of use and trends over time, surgical techniques, and barriers to obtain the procedure. We have emphasized the patient's perspective as a key element of choosing permanent contraception. This review has incorporated sections on salpingectomy, hysteroscopy, unmet need, impact of policies at religiously affiliated institutions, and reproductive coercion.

Risk of Sterilization Regret and Age: An Analysis of the National Survey of Family Growth, 2015-2019

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the risk of sterilization regret based on age at the time of sterilization in a contemporary group of women.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis of cross-sectional data from the 2015-2017 and 2017-2019 National Survey of Family Growth, Female Respondent Files, to estimate the proportion of women who experience sterilization regret. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the population and the proportion with regret. Sterilization regret was defined as someone who either underwent sterilization reversal or who definitely wanted sterilization reversal. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to assess associations with sterilization regret.

RESULTS

A total of 1,549 women who underwent sterilization were included in the analysis; 8% were aged 21-30 years, and 92% were aged older than 30 years. Of the participants, 16.9% identified as Black, 22.0% as Hispanic, and 57.2% as White. Most (58.4%) underwent a tubal sterilization procedure between age 21 and 30 years. The cumulative proportion of regret was 10.2% (12.6% for women who underwent sterilization at age 21-30 years and 6.7% for those who underwent sterilization at older than age 30 years). After controlling for covariates including age, race, parity, educational attainment, and medical reason for sterilization, the only variable that had a statistically significant association with regret was age at the time of the interview (P<.001). As women got older, they were less likely to report sterilization regret.

CONCLUSION

Younger women experience more sterilization regret. As women get older, sterilization regret decreases. Counseling about sterilization should reveal the unpredictability of future desire, but age alone must not be a barrier to performing sterilization.

Migration and Contraception among Mexican Women: Assessing Selection, Disruption, and Adaptation

Despite the sizeable impact of migration on childbearing, less is known about how it shapes contraceptive use undergirding fertility. We utilize binational survey data collected in 2006/7 by the Migration, Gender, and Health among Immigrant Latinos in Durham, NC study to assess how selection, disruption, and adaptation shape contraceptive use among Mexican migrant women. We address selectivity with respect to both socio-demographic and formative sexual initiation characteristics, comparing migrants to non-migrants in Mexico. We examine the disruptive effect of migration on contraception among migrant women sexually initiated in Mexico. Finally, we compare current methods between Mexican migrants and non-migrants to assess adaptation to U.S. contraceptive practices. We find migrant selectivity is less important than context in shaping immigrant women's contraceptive practices, though migrant women sexually initiated in the United States exhibit earlier and higher levels of contraceptive use than their migrant peers initiated in Mexico. Migration also disrupts contraceptive trajectories. Many migrants discontinue contraceptive use pre-migration in response to their husbands' solo migration. Partner separation also reduces contraceptive use immediately after migration. Finally, migrants show numerous signs of adaptation to the U.S. context, mainly via the adoption of oral contraception. The main obstacle for contraceptive use in Durham is lack of information about where to obtain it. Efforts to improve immigrants' reproductive health should recognize the deleterious effect of policies encouraging family separation. Healthcare must reach immigrant women soon after arrival, be attuned to pre-migration contraceptive practices, and recognize the unique vulnerabilities of women migrating at older ages.

Bring back the tubal: An intervention to provide postpartum tubal ligation in the underserved population

We aimed to improve educational awareness of postpartum bilateral tubal ligation (PPBTL), which we defined as a 15% improvement between pre-/post-intervention questionnaire scores. We followed patients desiring and undergoing PPBTL and reason for unfulfilled procedures from 2017-2018. OB/GYN, Nursing, and Anesthesia participated in educational sessions with pre-/post-intervention questionnaires. Comparing the first and latter six months after study initiation, PPBTLs performed increased from 39% to 54%. Fifty-two staff participated in the interventions, with a 21% improvement in scores (OB/GYN p = 0.0117, Nursing p = 0.0001, Anesthesia p = 0.0002). We conclude multidisciplinary interventions improved educational awareness, an integral part to increasing PPBTL performance in the underserved.

Mandatory Waiting Periods Before Abortion and Sterilization: Theory and Practice

Some laws insist on a fixed, compulsory waiting period between the time of obtaining consent and when abortions or sterilizations are carried out. Waiting periods are designed to allow for reflection on the decision and to minimize regret. In fact, the cognitive processing needed for these important decisions takes place relatively rapidly. Clinicians are used to handling cases individually and tailoring care appropriately, including giving more time for decision-making. Psychological considerations in relation to the role of emotion in decision-making, eg, regret, raise the possibility that waiting periods could have a detrimental impact on the emotional wellbeing of those concerned which might interfere with decision-making. Having an extended period of time to consider how much regret one might feel as a consequence of the decision one is faced with may make a person revisit a stable decision. In abortion care, waiting periods often result in an extra appointment being needed, delays in securing a procedure and personal distress for the applicant. Some women end up being beyond the gestational limit for abortion. Those requesting sterilization in a situation of active conflict in their relationship will do well to postpone a decision on sterilization. Otherwise, applicants for sterilization should not be forced to wait. Forced waiting undermines people's agency and autonomous decision-making ability. Low-income groups are particularly disadvantaged. It may be discriminatory when applied to marginalized groups. Concern about the validity of consent is best addressed by protective clinical guidelines rather than through rigid legislation. Waiting periods breach reproductive rights. Policymakers and politicians in countries that have waiting periods in sexual and reproductive health regulation should review relevant laws and policies and bring them into line with scientific and ethical evidence and international human rights law.

Women's Contraceptive Perceptions, Beliefs, and Attitudes: An Integrative Review of Qualitative Research

INTRODUCTION

Unintended pregnancy rates will remain high until researchers explore the lived experience of women's relationships with contraception. This integrative review examines the extant qualitative literature on women's contraception to illuminate common themes in women's perspectives through the lens of the feminist poststructuralist framework.

METHODS

A literature review of PubMed and CINAHL databases was completed for English-language studies conducted in the United States from January 2008 through September 2018 that qualitatively examined women's perceptions, beliefs, and attitudes regarding contraception. Reports, dissertations, mixed-methods research, and literature reviews were excluded. The sample, methods, and findings of 19 studies were reviewed. Themes were identified using the 5 major tenets of the feminist poststructuralist framework: discourse, power, language, subjectivity, and agency.

RESULTS

Themes of power imbalance between partners and health care providers; societal and communal discourses on femininity and motherhood; distrust of hormonal contraception; the ability to enhance personal agency through contraceptive decision making; and a need for open, patient-focused communication arose from the 19 studies included in the review.

DISCUSSION

Using a feminist poststructuralist framework to examine women's contraceptive perceptions illuminates and magnifies the many ways in which contraceptive beliefs and use are dependent on gender roles and power dynamics. Gaps in knowledge specific to older women and exploration of women's subjectivity should be addressed. Clinicians should evaluate the power structures inherent to their practice while providing woman-focused, evidence-based contraceptive education.

Obstetrician-gynecologists' counseling regarding postpartum sterilization

Introduction

Obstetrician-gynecologists (ob-gyns) play a prominent role in counseling patients regarding sterilization, offering alternative contraception, fulfilling sterilization requests, and referring patients if unable to provide the service due to a personal moral belief. Therefore, we sought to better characterize the counseling practices of ob-gyns with respect to postpartum sterilization.

Materials and methods

This is a prospective, electronic survey-based study of 1,000 ob-gyn members of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, half of whom are members of the Collaborative Ambulatory Research Network.

Results

A total of 188 of 957 surveyed physicians (19.6%) opened and responded to the survey, after accounting for exclusions. Age (31.9%), body mass index (28.7%), and medical history (27.1%) were the three most frequent reasons for an ob-gyn reported declining to perform sterilization in a patient requesting sterilization. Medical history (36.2%), parity (31.9%), and availability of alternative contraception (27.7%) were the three most frequent reasons that an ob-gyn reported recommending postpartum sterilization in a patient not requesting sterilization.

Conclusion

Our study has identified both medical and nonmedical factors that impact ob-gyns likelihood to recommend either toward or against postpartum sterilization. Nonmedical factors included clinical logistical issues such as availability of the operating room as well as considerations of a patient’s age, parity, gestational age at delivery, and whether the husband was in agreement. Physicians should be cautious of inappropriately blending medical decision-making with paternalistic counseling.

Medicaid and fulfillment of desired postpartum sterilization

OBJECTIVE

We sought to assess fulfillment of sterilization requests while accounting for the complex interplay between insurance, clinical and social factors in a contemporary context that included both inpatient and outpatient postpartum sterilization procedures.

STUDY DESIGN

This is a retrospective single-center cohort chart review study of 1331 women with a documented contraceptive plan at time of postpartum discharge of sterilization. We compared sterilization fulfillment within 90days of delivery, time to sterilization and rate of subsequent pregnancy after nonfulfillment between women with Medicaid and women with private insurance.

RESULTS

A total of 475 of 1030 Medicaid-insured and 100 of 154 privately insured women received postpartum sterilization (46.1% vs. 64.9%, p<.001). Women with Medicaid had a longer time from delivery to completion of the sterilization request (p<.001). After adjusting for age, parity, gestational age, mode of delivery, adequacy of prenatal care, race/ethnicity, marital status and education level, private insurance status was not associated with either sterilization fulfillment [odds ratio 0.94, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.54-1.64] or time to sterilization (hazard ratio 1.03, 95% C.I. 0.73-1.34). Of the 555 Medicaid-insured women who did not receive a postpartum sterilization, 267 (48.1%) had valid Title XIX sterilization consent forms at time of delivery. Of women who did not receive sterilization, 132 of 555 Medicaid patients and 5 of 54 privately insured patients became pregnant within 1 year (23.8% vs. 9.3%, p=.023).

CONCLUSION

Differences in fulfillment rates of postpartum sterilization and time to sterilization between women with Medicaid versus private insurance are similar after adjusting for relevant clinical and demographic factors. Women with Medicaid are more likely than women with private insurance to have a short interval repeat pregnancy after an unfulfilled sterilization request.

IMPLICATIONS

Efforts are needed to ensure that Medicaid recipients who desire sterilization receive timely services.

Contraception After Delivery Among Publicly Insured Women in Texas: Use Compared With Preference

OBJECTIVE

To assess women's preferences for contraception after delivery and to compare use with preferences.

METHODS

In a prospective cohort study of women aged 18-44 years who wanted to delay childbearing for at least 2 years, we interviewed 1,700 participants from eight hospitals in Texas immediately postpartum and at 3 and 6 months after delivery. At 3 months, we assessed contraceptive preferences by asking what method women would like to be using at 6 months. We modeled preference for highly effective contraception and use given preference according to childbearing intentions using mixed-effects logistic regression testing for variability across hospitals and differences between those with and without immediate postpartum long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) provision.

RESULTS

Approximately 80% completed both the 3- and 6-month interviews (1,367/1,700). Overall, preferences exceeded use for both-LARC: 40.8% (n=547) compared with 21.9% (n=293) and sterilization: 36.1% (n=484) compared with 17.5% (n=235). In the mixed-effects logistic regression models, several demographic variables were associated with a preference for LARC among women who wanted more children, but there was no significant variability across hospitals. For women who wanted more children and had a LARC preference, use of LARC was higher in the hospital that offered immediate postpartum provision (P<.035) as it was for U.S.-born women (odds ratio [OR] 2.08, 95% CI 1.17-3.69) and women with public prenatal care providers (OR 2.04, 95% CI 1.13-3.69). In the models for those who wanted no more children, there was no significant variability in preferences for long-acting or permanent methods across hospitals. However, use given preference varied across hospitals (P<.001) and was lower for black women (OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.12-0.55) and higher for U.S.-born women (OR 2.32, 95% CI 1.36-3.96), those 30 years of age and older (OR 1.82, 95% CI 1.07-3.09), and those with public prenatal care providers (OR 2.04, 95% CI 1.18-3.51).

CONCLUSION

Limited use of long-acting and permanent contraceptive methods after delivery is associated with indicators of health care provider and system-level barriers. Expansion of immediate postpartum LARC provision as well as contraceptive coverage for undocumented women could reduce the gap between preference and use.

Inpatient Postpartum Long-Acting Reversible Contraception and Sterilization in the United States, 2008-2013

OBJECTIVE

To measure rates of long-acting reversible contraception (LARC), including intrauterine devices and contraceptive implants, and tubal sterilization during delivery hospitalizations and correlates of their use.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study used the 2008-2013 National Inpatient Sample, a publicly available all-payer database. We identified delivery hospitalizations with the International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification codes for intrauterine device insertion, contraceptive implant insertion, and tubal sterilization. We used weighted multivariable logistic regression to examine associations between predictors (age, delivery mode, medical comorbidity, payer, hospital type, geographic region, and year) and likelihood of LARC and sterilization and to compare characteristics of LARC and sterilization users.

RESULTS

Our sample included 4,691,683 discharges, representing 22,667,204 delivery hospitalizations. Long-acting reversible contraception insertion increased from 1.86 per 10,000 deliveries (2008-2009) to 13.5 per 10,000 deliveries (2012-2013; P<.001); tubal sterilization remained stable (711-683 per 10,000 deliveries; P=.24). In multivariable analysis adjusting for all predictors, compared with neither LARC nor sterilization, LARC use was highest among women with medical comorbidities (count per 10,000 deliveries: 15.04, standard error 2.11, adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.92, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.72-2.13), nonprivate payer (13.50, standard error 2.14, adjusted OR 5.23, 95% CI 3.82-7.16), and at urban teaching hospitals (14.92, standard error 2.25, adjusted OR 20.85, 95% CI 12.73-34.15). Sterilization was least likely among women aged 24 years or younger (251.04, standard error 4.88, adjusted OR 0.12 95% CI 0.12-0.13, compared with 35 years or older) and most likely with cesarean delivery (1,568.74, standard error 20.81, adjusted OR 6.25, 95% CI 5.88-6.63). Comparing only LARC and sterilization users, LARC users tended to have nonprivate insurance (84.95% compared with 57.17%, adjusted OR 1.90, 95% CI 1.38-2.63) and deliver at urban teaching hospitals (94.65% compared with 45.47%, adjusted OR 38.39, 23.52-62.64) in later study years (2012-2013; 55.72% compared with 32.18%, adjusted OR 8.26, 95% CI 4.42-15.44, compared with 2008-2009).

CONCLUSION

Long-acting reversible contraception insertion increased from 1.86 to 13.5 per 10,000 deliveries but remained less than 2% of the sterilization rate. Inpatient postpartum LARC insertion is more likely among sicker, poorer women delivering at urban teaching hospitals.

Barriers to Offering Vasectomy at Publicly Funded Family Planning Organizations in Texas

Few publicly funded family planning clinics in the United States offer vasectomy, but little is known about the reasons this method is not more widely available at these sources of care. Between February 2012 and February 2015, three waves of in-depth interviews were conducted with program administrators at 54 family planning organizations in Texas. Participants described their organization’s vasectomy service model and factors that influenced how frequently vasectomy was provided. Interview transcripts were coded and analyzed using a theme-based approach. Service models and barriers to providing vasectomy were compared by organization type (e.g., women’s health center, public health clinic) and receipt of Title X funding. Two thirds of organizations did not offer vasectomy on-site or pay for referrals with family planning funding; nine organizations frequently provided vasectomy. Organizations did not widely offer vasectomy because they could not find providers that would accept the low reimbursement for the procedure or because they lacked funding for men’s reproductive health care. Respondents often did not perceive men’s reproductive health care as a service priority and commented that men, especially Latinos, had limited interest in vasectomy. Although organizations of all types reported barriers, women’s health centers and Title X-funded organizations more frequently offered vasectomy by conducting tailored outreach to men and vasectomy providers. A combination of factors operating at the health systems and provider level influence the availability of vasectomy at publicly funded family planning organizations in Texas. Multilevel approaches that address key barriers to vasectomy provision would help organizations offer comprehensive contraceptive services.

Barriers to Offering Vasectomy at Publicly Funded Family Planning Organizations in Texas

Few publicly funded family planning clinics in the United States offer vasectomy, but little is known about the reasons this method is not more widely available at these sources of care. Between February 2012 and February 2015, three waves of in-depth interviews were conducted with program administrators at 54 family planning organizations in Texas. Participants described their organization’s vasectomy service model and factors that influenced how frequently vasectomy was provided. Interview transcripts were coded and analyzed using a theme-based approach. Service models and barriers to providing vasectomy were compared by organization type (e.g., women’s health center, public health clinic) and receipt of Title X funding. Two thirds of organizations did not offer vasectomy on-site or pay for referrals with family planning funding; nine organizations frequently provided vasectomy. Organizations did not widely offer vasectomy because they could not find providers that would accept the low reimbursement for the procedure or because they lacked funding for men’s reproductive health care. Respondents often did not perceive men’s reproductive health care as a service priority and commented that men, especially Latinos, had limited interest in vasectomy. Although organizations of all types reported barriers, women’s health centers and Title X-funded organizations more frequently offered vasectomy by conducting tailored outreach to men and vasectomy providers. A combination of factors operating at the health systems and provider level influence the availability of vasectomy at publicly funded family planning organizations in Texas. Multilevel approaches that address key barriers to vasectomy provision would help organizations offer comprehensive contraceptive services.

Barriers to Postpartum Contraception in Texas and Pregnancy Within 2 Years of Delivery

OBJECTIVE

To assess pregnancies that could have been averted through improved access to contraceptive methods in the 2 years after delivery.

METHODS

In this cohort study, we interviewed 403 postpartum women in a hospital in Austin, Texas, who wanted to delay childbearing for at least 2 years. Follow-up interviews were completed at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 months after delivery; retention at 24 months was 83%. At each interview, participants reported their pregnancy status and contraceptive method. At the 3- and 6-month interviews, participants were also asked about their preferred contraceptive method 3 months in the future. We identified types of barriers among women unable to access their preferred method and used Cox models to analyze the risk of pregnancy from 6 to 24 months after delivery.

RESULTS

Among women interviewed 6 months postpartum (n=377), two thirds had experienced a barrier to accessing their preferred method of contraception. By 24 months postpartum, 89 women had reported a pregnancy; 71 were unintended. Between 6 and 24 months postpartum, 77 of 377 women became pregnant (20.4%), with 56 (14.9%) lost to follow-up. Women who encountered a barrier to obtaining their preferred method were more likely to become pregnant less than 24 months after delivery. They had a cumulative risk of pregnancy of 34% (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.25-0.43) as compared with 12% (95% CI 0.05-0.18) for women with no barrier. All but three of the women reporting an unintended pregnancy had earlier expressed interest in using long-acting reversible contraception or a permanent method.

CONCLUSION

In this study, most unintended pregnancies less than 24 months after delivery could have been prevented or postponed had women been able to access their desired long-acting and permanent methods.

Perceived Interest in Vasectomy among Latina Women and their Partners in a Community with Limited Access to Female Sterilization

The low prevalence of vasectomy among Latino men in the United States is often attributed to cultural characteristics despite limited evidence supporting this hypothesis. We assessed male partners' perceived willingness to undergo vasectomy through surveys with 470 Mexican-origin women who did not want more children in El Paso, Texas. Overall, 32% of women reported that their partner would be interested in getting a vasectomy. In multivariable analysis, completing high school (OR=2.03 [1.05, 3.95]), having some college education (OR=2.97 [1.36, 6.48]) or receiving US government assistance (OR=1.95 [1.1, 3.45]) was associated with partners' perceived interest. Additionally, we conducted two focus groups on men's knowledge and attitudes about vasectomy with partners of a subsample of these women. Despite some misperceptions, male partners were willing to get a vasectomy, but were concerned about cost and taking time off work to recover. Health education and affordable vasectomy services could increase vasectomy use among Mexican-origin men.

Trends and Disparities in Postpartum Sterilization after Cesarean Section, 2000 through 2008

PURPOSE

Tubal sterilization patterns are influenced by factors including patient race, ethnicity, level of education, method of payment, and hospital size and affiliation. However, less is known about how these factors influence tubal sterilizations performed as secondary procedures after cesarean sections (C-sections). Thus, this study examines variations in the prevalence of postpartum tubal sterilizations after C-sections from 2000 to 2008.

METHODS

We used data from the National Hospital Discharge Survey to estimate odds ratios for patient-level (race, marital status, age) and system-level (hospital size, type, region) factors on the likelihood of receiving tubal sterilization after C-section.

RESULTS

A disproportionate share of postpartum tubal sterilizations after C-section was covered by Medicaid. The likelihood of undergoing sterilization was increased for Black women, women of older age, and non-single women. Additionally, they were increased in proprietary and government hospitals, smaller hospital settings, and the Southern United States.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings indicate that Black women and those with Medicaid coverage in particular were substantially more likely to undergo postpartum tubal sterilization after C-section. We also found that hospital characteristics and region were significant predictors. This adds to the growing body of evidence that suggests that tubal sterilization may be a disparity issue patterned by multiple factors and calls for greater understanding of the role of patient-, provider-, and system-level characteristics on such outcomes.

Geographic Variation in Characteristics of Postpartum Women Using Female Sterilization

BACKGROUND

Southern states have higher rates of female sterilization compared with other areas of the United States, and the reasons for this are not well understood. We examined whether low-income and racial/ethnic minority women, who were previous targets of coercive practices, disproportionately report using sterilization in the South.

METHODS

We used data from 12 states participating in the Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System that collected information on women's contraceptive method use between 2006 and 2009. We categorized states according to geographic region: South, Midwest/West, and Northeast. Within each region, we computed the percentage of women using sterilization according to their demographic and obstetric characteristics and estimated multivariable-adjusted prevalence ratios to evaluate whether the same characteristics were associated with sterilization use.

FINDINGS

The percentage of postpartum women using sterilization ranged from 5.0% to 9.9% in the Northeast, 8.9% to 10.6% in the Midwest/West, and 11.6% to 22.4% in the South. Women in nearly all subgroups in Southern states were more likely to use sterilization than women in the Northeast. After multivariable adjustment, there were no differences in the prevalence of sterilization for Blacks compared with Whites in the Northeast (0.76; 95% CI, 0.55-1.06), Midwest/West (0.91; 95% CI, 0.80-1.04), and South (0.96; 95% CI, 0.85-1.07). Women with Medicaid-paid deliveries (vs. private insurance) had a higher prevalence of sterilization in all regions (p < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

These findings do not indicate that low-income and racial/ethnic minority women in the South use sterilization at disproportionately higher rates compared with other regions, and suggest that other differences, such as social norms and family planning policies, may contribute to this geographic variation.

FIGO's ethical recommendations on female sterilisation will do more harm than good: a commentary

The International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) Committee for the Ethical Aspects of Human Reproduction and Women's Health advises against tubal occlusion (TO) performed at the time of caesarean section (CS/TO) or following a vaginal delivery (VD/TO) if this sterilisation has not been discussed with the woman in an earlier phase of her pregnancy. This advice is neither in accordance with existing medical custom nor evidence based. Particularly in less-resourced locations, adherence to it would deny much wanted one-off sterilisation opportunities to hundreds of thousands of women, many of whom have no reliable contraceptive alternative. To be sure, a well-timed discussion in pregnancy about a potential peripartum TO is preferable and, if conducted as a matter of course (as the Committee appears to promote), would represent an enormous improvement on current practice. Earlier counselling has the advantage that it results in fewer women who regret having rejected the CS/TO or VD/TO option. However, there is no evidence that earlier counselling leads to a smaller proportion of regretted sterilisations. Consequently, where early TO counselling has been impossible, forgotten or deliberately omitted on pronatalist, traditional, financial, cultural or religious grounds, offering a perinatal sterilisation belatedly and in an unbiased, culturally sensitive manner is often verifiably better than not presenting that option at all, notably where high parity and uterine scars are particularly dangerous. Belated counselling, as will be demonstrated in this paper, saves many lives. The Committee's blanket rejection of belated counselling on perinatal sterilisation is therefore unjustified.

Unmet demand for highly effective postpartum contraception in Texas

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to assess women's contraceptive preferences and use in the first 6 months after delivery. The postpartum period represents a key opportunity for women to learn about and obtain effective contraception, especially since 50% of unintended pregnancies to parous women occur within 2 years of a previous birth.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective cohort study of 800 postpartum women recruited from three hospitals in Austin and El Paso, TX. Women aged 18-44 who wanted to delay childbearing for at least 24 months were eligible for the study and completed interviews following delivery and at 3 and 6 months postpartum. Participants were asked about the contraceptive method they were currently using and the method they would prefer to use at 6 months after delivery.

RESULTS

At 6 months postpartum, 13% of women were using an intrauterine device or implant, and 17% were sterilized or had a partner who had had a vasectomy. Twenty-four percent were using hormonal methods, and 45% relied on less effective methods, mainly condoms and withdrawal. Yet 44% reported that they would prefer to be using sterilization, and 34% would prefer to be using long-acting reversible contraception (LARC).

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows a considerable preference for LARC and permanent methods at 6 months postpartum. However, there is a marked discordance between women's method preference and actual use, indicating substantial unmet demand for highly effective methods of contraception.

IMPLICATIONS

In two Texas cities, many more women preferred long-acting and permanent contraceptive methods (LAPM) than were able to access these methods at 6 months postpartum. Women's contraceptive needs could be better met by counseling about all methods, by reducing cost barriers and by making LAPM available at more sites.

Reconsidering racial/ethnic differences in sterilization in the United States

OBJECTIVE

Cross-sectional studies have found that low-income and racial/ethnic minority women are more likely to use female sterilization and less likely to rely on a partner's vasectomy than women with higher incomes and whites. However, studies of pregnant and postpartum women report that racial/ethnic minorities, particularly low-income minority women, face greater barriers in obtaining a sterilization than do whites and those with higher incomes. In this paper, we address this apparent contradiction by examining the likelihood a woman gets a sterilization following each delivery, which removes from the comparison any difference in the number of births she has experienced.

STUDY DESIGN

Using the 2006-2010 National Survey of Family Growth, we fit multivariable-adjusted logistic and Cox regression models to estimate odds ratios and hazard ratios for getting a postpartum or interval sterilization, respectively, according to race/ethnicity and insurance status.

RESULTS

Women's chances of obtaining a sterilization varied by both race/ethnicity and insurance. Among women with Medicaid, whites were more likely to use female sterilization than African Americans and Latinas. Privately insured whites were more likely to rely on vasectomy than African Americans and Latinas, but among women with Medicaid-paid deliveries reliance on vasectomy was low for all racial/ethnic groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Low-income racial/ethnic minority women are less likely to undergo sterilization following delivery compared to low-income whites and privately insured women of similar parities. This could result from unique barriers to obtaining permanent contraception and could expose women to the risk of future unintended pregnancies.

IMPLICATIONS

Low-income minorities are less likely to undergo sterilization than low-income whites and privately insured minorities, which may result from barriers to obtaining permanent contraception, and exposes women to unintended pregnancies.

Potential unintended pregnancies averted and cost savings associated with a revised Medicaid sterilization policy

OBJECTIVE

Medicaid sterilization policy, which includes a mandatory 30-day waiting period between consent and the sterilization procedure, poses significant logistical barriers for many women who desire publicly funded sterilization. Our goal was to estimate the number of unintended pregnancies and the associated costs resulting from unfulfilled sterilization requests due to Medicaid policy barriers.

STUDY DESIGN

We constructed a cost-effectiveness model from the health care payer perspective to determine the incremental cost over a 1-year time horizon of the current Medicaid sterilization policy compared to a hypothetical, revised policy in which women who desire a postpartum sterilization would face significantly reduced barriers. Probability estimates for potential outcomes in the model were based on published sources; costs of Medicaid-funded sterilizations and Medicaid-covered births were based on data from the Medicaid Statistical Information System and The Guttmacher Institute, respectively.

RESULTS

With the implementation of a revised Medicaid sterilization policy, we estimated that the number of fulfilled sterilization requests would increase by 45%, from 53.3% of all women having their sterilization requests fulfilled to 77.5%. Annually, this increase could potentially lead to over 29,000 unintended pregnancies averted and $215 million saved.

CONCLUSION

A revised Medicaid sterilization policy could potentially honor women's reproductive decisions, reduce the number of unintended pregnancies and save a significant amount of public funds.

IMPLICATION

Compared to the current federal Medicaid sterilization policy, a hypothetical, revised policy that reduces logistical barriers for women who desire publicly funded, postpartum sterilization could potentially avert over 29,000 unintended pregnancies annually and therefore lead to cost savings of $215 million each year.

Knowledge and attitudes about long-acting reversible contraception among Latina women who desire sterilization

BACKGROUND

There is growing interest in increasing the use of long-acting reversible contraception (LARC), and suggestions that such methods may serve as an alternative to sterilization. However, there is little information about whether women who do not want more children would be interested in using LARC.

METHODS

We conducted semistructured interviews with 120 parous Latina women in El Paso, Texas, who wanted a sterilization but had not obtained one. We assessed women's awareness of and interest in using the copper intrauterine device (IUD), levonorgestrel intrauterine system (LNG-IUS), and etonogestrel implant.

FINDINGS

Overall, 51%, 23%, and 47% of women reported they had heard of the copper IUD, LNG-IUS, and implant, respectively. More women stated they would use the copper IUD (24%) than the LNG-IUS (14%) or implant (9%). Among women interested in LARC, the most common reasons were that, relative to their current method, LARC methods were more convenient, effective, and provided longer-term protection against pregnancy. Those who had reservations about LARC were primarily concerned with menstrual changes. Women also had concerns about side effects and the methods' effectiveness in preventing pregnancy, preferring to use a familiar method.

CONCLUSIONS

Although these findings indicate many Latina women in this setting do not consider LARC an alternative to sterilization, they point to an existing demand among some who wish to end childbearing. Efforts are needed to improve women's knowledge and access to a range of methods so they can achieve their childbearing goals.

Knowledge and beliefs about reproductive anatomy and physiology among Mexican-Origin women in the USA: implications for effective oral contraceptive use

Inherent in many reproductive health and family planning programmes is the problematic assumption that the body, its processes and modifications to it are universally experienced in the same way. This paper addresses contraceptive knowledge and beliefs among Mexican-origin women, based upon data gathered by the qualitative component of the Border Contraceptive Access Study. Open-ended interviews explored the perceived mechanism of action of the pill, side-effects, non-contraceptive benefits, and general knowledge of contraception. Findings revealed complex connections between traditional and scientific information. The use of medical terms (e.g. 'hormone') illustrated attempts to integrate new information with existing knowledge and belief systems. Conclusions address concerns that existing information and services may not be sufficient if population-specific knowledge and beliefs are not assessed and addressed. Findings can contribute to the development of effective education, screening and reproductive health services.

Patterns of contraceptive use among Mexican-origin women

BACKGROUND

Mexican women in the United States (US) have higher rates of fertility compared to other ethnic groups and women in Mexico. Whether variation in women's access to family planning services or patterns of contraceptive use contributes to this higher fertility has received little attention.

OBJECTIVE

We explore Mexican women's contraceptive use, taking into account women's place in the reproductive life course.

METHODS

Using nationally representative samples from the US (National Survey of Family Growth) and Mexico (Encuesta National de la Dinámica Demográfica), we compared the parity-specific frequency of contraceptive use and fertility intentions for non-migrant women, foreign-born Mexicans in the US, US-born Mexicans, and whites.

RESULTS

Mexican women in the US were less likely to use IUDs and more likely to use hormonal contraception than women in Mexico. Female sterilization was the most common method among higher parity women in both the US and Mexico, however, foreign-born Mexicans were less likely to be sterilized, and the least likely to use any permanent contraceptive method. Although foreign-born Mexicans were slightly less likely to report that they did not want more children, differences in method use remained after controlling for women's fertility intentions.

CONCLUSION

At all parities, foreign-born Mexicans used less effective methods. These findings suggest that varying access to family planning services may contribute to variation in women's contraceptive use.

COMMENTS

Future studies are needed to clarify the extent to which disparities in fertility result from differences in contraceptive access.