Review of Publicly Available State Reimbursement Policies for Removal and Reinsertion of Long-Acting Reversible Contraception.

IF 1.8 Q3 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY Open access journal of contraception Pub Date : 2024-11-14 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.2147/OAJC.S479397
Ekwutosi M Okoroh, Charlan D Kroelinger, Olivia R Sappenfield, Julia F Howland, Lisa M Romero, Keriann Uesugi, Shanna Cox
{"title":"Review of Publicly Available State Reimbursement Policies for Removal and Reinsertion of Long-Acting Reversible Contraception.","authors":"Ekwutosi M Okoroh, Charlan D Kroelinger, Olivia R Sappenfield, Julia F Howland, Lisa M Romero, Keriann Uesugi, Shanna Cox","doi":"10.2147/OAJC.S479397","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>We examined reimbursement policies for the removal and reinsertion of long-acting reversible contraception (LARC).</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>We conducted a standardized, web-based review of publicly available state policies for language on reimbursement of LARC removal and reinsertion. We also summarized policy language on barriers to reimbursement for LARC removal and reinsertion.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-six (52%) of the 50 states had publicly available policies that addressed reimbursement for LARC removal. Of these 26 states, 14 (28%) included language on reimbursement for LARC reinsertion. Eleven (42%) of 26 states included language on additional requirements for reimbursement for removal and/or reinsertion: five state policies included language with other requirements for removal only, three policies included language with additional requirements for reinsertion only, and three included language with additional requirements for both. Three state policies specified no restrictions be placed on reimbursement for removal and one specified no restrictions be placed on reimbursement for reinsertion.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Half of the states in the US do not have publicly available policies on reimbursement for the removal and reinsertion of LARC devices. Inclusion of unrestricted access to these services is important for contraceptive choice and reproductive autonomy.</p>","PeriodicalId":74348,"journal":{"name":"Open access journal of contraception","volume":"15 ","pages":"107-118"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11573686/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Open access journal of contraception","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/OAJC.S479397","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: We examined reimbursement policies for the removal and reinsertion of long-acting reversible contraception (LARC).

Patients and methods: We conducted a standardized, web-based review of publicly available state policies for language on reimbursement of LARC removal and reinsertion. We also summarized policy language on barriers to reimbursement for LARC removal and reinsertion.

Results: Twenty-six (52%) of the 50 states had publicly available policies that addressed reimbursement for LARC removal. Of these 26 states, 14 (28%) included language on reimbursement for LARC reinsertion. Eleven (42%) of 26 states included language on additional requirements for reimbursement for removal and/or reinsertion: five state policies included language with other requirements for removal only, three policies included language with additional requirements for reinsertion only, and three included language with additional requirements for both. Three state policies specified no restrictions be placed on reimbursement for removal and one specified no restrictions be placed on reimbursement for reinsertion.

Conclusion: Half of the states in the US do not have publicly available policies on reimbursement for the removal and reinsertion of LARC devices. Inclusion of unrestricted access to these services is important for contraceptive choice and reproductive autonomy.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
对各州公开发布的长效可逆避孕药取出和重新插入的报销政策进行审查。
目的:我们研究了长效可逆避孕药具(LARC)取出和重新植入的报销政策:我们对各州公开的 LARC 移除和再植入报销政策进行了标准化的网络审查。我们还总结了有关 LARC 取出和重新插入的报销障碍的政策语言:在 50 个州中,有 26 个州(52%)的公开政策涉及 LARC 取出的报销问题。在这 26 个州中,有 14 个州(28%)的政策中包含了对 LARC 重新插入的报销规定。在这 26 个州中,有 11 个州(42%)的政策中包含了对取出和/或重新插入 LARC 补偿的其他要求:有 5 个州的政策中只包含了对取出 LARC 的其他要求,有 3 个州的政策中只包含了对重新插入 LARC 的其他要求,有 3 个州的政策中同时包含了对两者的其他要求。有 3 个州的政策规定不限制对移除的补偿,有 1 个州规定不限制对重新插入的补偿:结论:美国有一半的州没有公开发布关于 LARC 装置取出和重新插入的报销政策。不受限制地提供这些服务对于避孕选择和生育自主权非常重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊最新文献
Contraception Use in Cancer Survivors, Clinical Practice and Patients' Preferences. Patient-Centred Counselling Tools for Dispensing Contraceptives in Community Pharmacy Settings: A Systematic Review. Review of Publicly Available State Reimbursement Policies for Removal and Reinsertion of Long-Acting Reversible Contraception. Patient Perceived Quality of Virtual Group Contraception Counseling. Prevalence of Depression Among Women Using Hormonal Contraceptives in Mogadishu, Somalia: A Cross-Sectional Study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1