Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health最新文献

Previous research on abortion-related crowdfunding campaigns found that they are impacted by stigma around abortion and rarely successful. This paper analyzes crowdfunding activity in the US following a leak of the Supreme Court decision in Dobbs. V. Jackson Women's Health Organization, a time period that saw increased financial support of abortion access funds. Crowdfunding campaigns that included "abort" or "abortion" and were created between May 2 and November 8, 2022 were recorded from the GoFundMe and GiveSendGo crowdfunding platforms. These campaigns were reviewed for whether they were US based and sought funding where abortion was used as a justification for support. Included campaigns were assigned a campaign recipient type: (1) Organizations providing abortion access; (2) Organizations seeking legal protection for abortion; (3) Individuals seeking abortion access; (4) Organizations seeking to reduce abortion access; and (5) Individuals with needs resulting from choosing not to access abortion. The authors also identified four types of rationale for supporting these campaigns. Following a leak of the Dobbs decision, 398 abortion-related crowdfunding campaigns in the US raised over $3.8 million from over 50,000 donations. Campaigns supporting abortion access organizations raised higher median amounts than organizations seeking to reduce abortion access. Individuals seeking abortion access raised higher median amounts than individuals who chose not to terminate a pregnancy. In a reversal from pre-Dobbs crowdfunding, abortion access campaigns tended to outperform other abortion-related campaigns. It is not clear how long-lived this change in support will be and campaigners remain vulnerable to changes in platforms' content moderation policies.

Background: Adolescent contraceptive decision-making is influenced by a number of patient and clinician-driven factors. Although the AAP continues to endorse an efficacy-based model of contraceptive counseling, many professional organizations are shifting to a shared decision-making model as the optimal approach for providing unbiased and patient-driven contraceptive counseling. While SDM is intended to reduce the influence of clinician bias, it can exacerbate inequity if a clinician tailors a conversation based on their assumptions of a patient's goals or preferences. In this qualitative study, we explored self-reported contraceptive counseling practices among US-based clinicians who see adolescent patients to assess how these practices create barriers or facilitators to SDM and person-centered contraceptive care.

Methods: We interviewed 16 clinicians at the 2022 AAP Annual Meeting who counsel adolescent patients about contraception. We used thematic content analysis to analyze interview transcripts using Dedoose.

Results: We identified six aspects of contraceptive counseling that clinicians commonly employed with adolescent patients. These were: (1) sociodemographic characteristics driving counseling, (2) reliance on tiered effectiveness counseling, (3) initiating counseling conversations using "ask then explain" or "explain then ask" approaches, (4) emphasis on teen pregnancy prevention, (5) the influence of method accessibility on counseling, and (6) parental involvement in decision-making and patient confidentiality. We describe how these themes align with or diverge from each component of the SDM framework.

Conclusion: Clinicians in this study frequently engaged in non-patient-centered techniques during contraceptive counseling with adolescents. These findings can inform practice recommendations to support clinicians in providing high-quality contraceptive counseling using shared decision-making.

On January 30, 2024, over 300 researchers filed an amicus brief in FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, a United States (US) Supreme Court case that could have severely impacted access to mifepristone, one of the two drugs commonly used in medication abortion. The researchers summarize the legal challenges to the US Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) original approval of mifepristone in 2000 and its 2016 and 2021 decisions modifying mifepristone's Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) Program and label, the responses from the FDA and drug manufacturer to the challenges, and the potential implications of the Court's decision on access to mifepristone in the US. The researchers detail how the FDA relied on a robust scientific record analyzing tens of thousands of patient experiences that conclusively demonstrated the safety and effectiveness of the changes to the mifepristone REMS Program and label and urge the Supreme Court to rely on the clear scientific record and preserve access to mifepristone without reimposing restrictions. What follows is a reprint of this brief.

Introduction: Although menstruation is a natural biological process, many people feel embarrassed of their menses and struggle to discuss it. To mitigate menstrual communication stigma, it is necessary to first elucidate communication experiences and perceptions. Thus, we qualitatively explore menstrual communication among cisgender women who menstruate and their family, friends, healthcare providers, and community.

Methodology: In partnership with No More Secrets (NMS), a Philadelphia menstrual health non-profit, we conducted a community-based participatory research (CBPR) project in Fall 2020. Cisgender, menstruating individuals ages 18-45 recruited from NMS' catchment in Philadelphia participated in semi-structured interviews about their menstrual experiences and communication (N = 20). A deductive, theory-driven approached based on the social-ecological model was used to analyze the data.

Results: Varying emotional responses arose across social-ecological levels: communication was awkward and simplistic with family; positive and supportive with friends and community members; and uncomfortable and frustrating with healthcare providers. Participants echoed the importance of menstrual communication as a means of sharing information, feeling less alone, and decreasing menstrual stigma.

Discussion: Findings can inform future CBPR workshops that address stigma in familial, healthcare, and community-based discussions to improve menstrual health and experiences for cisgender girls and women, transgender men, and gender non-binary individuals who menstruate.

On January 30, 2024, over 300 researchers filed an amicus brief in FDA v. Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine, a United States (US) Supreme Court case concerning the regulatory status of mifepristone, one of two drugs used in medication abortion. In this Comment we summarize the legal challenge, responses from the FDA and drug manufacturer to these challenges, oral arguments presented before the Court, and the implications of the Court's decision on access to mifepristone in the US. We also summarize the content of the accompanying amicus brief.

Objective: We describe the experiences and preferences of women who switched from clinic-administered intramuscular depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA-IM) to self-administered subcutaneous DMPA (DMPA-SC) in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods: We conducted interviews with women in California and Washington about their experiences with self-administered DMPA-SC. We interviewed women after their first or second self-administered DMPA-SC injection and conducted follow-up interviews after their third or fourth injection. We performed both thematic and descriptive content analyses.

Results: We completed 29 interviews with 15 women. Most participants (n = 10) were between the ages of 20 and 39 and the majority (n = 12) used DMPA primarily for contraception. Most (n = 13) described self-administered DMPA-SC as "very easy" or "somewhat easy" to use and reported greater convenience, decreased pain, fewer logistical and financial challenges, increased privacy, and improved comfort with injection compared to DMPA-IM. Participants identified difficulties obtaining DMPA-SC from pharmacies and safe needle disposal as barriers. Most (n = 13) would recommend DMPA-SC to a friend and desired to continue self-administration beyond the COVID-19 pandemic. Participants recommended counseling all patients about this option alongside other contraceptive methods, and offering clinician supervision, if desired.

Conclusion: Women who switched from in-clinic DMPA-IM to self-administered DMPA-SC during the COVID-19 pandemic preferred the latter and intended to continue self-administration. Self-administration of DMPA-SC should be routinely offered and easily accessible to patients.

Introduction: Intimate partner violence (IPV) involves an individual committing acts intended to harm or intimidate a current or former romantic partner. The COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent stay-at-home orders often trapped victims with perpetrators and intensified IPV. Although sexual and gender diverse people disproportionately experience IPV compared to cisgender, heterosexual people, their experiences are not well documented in the Canadian context. This study aimed to explore the experiences of Two-Spirit, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex, asexual, and other sexual and gender diverse (2S/LGBTQIA+) people with IPV in Ontario and how the COVID-19 pandemic affected their IPV experiences.

Methods: We conducted in-depth, semi-structured interviews with self-identified 2S/LGBTQIA+ people who experienced IPV on/after March 15, 2020. We audio-recorded and transcribed all interviews and coded the transcripts for content and themes using inductive and deductive techniques.

Results: Our 20 participants experienced physical, psychological, sexual, and financial abuse. Technology-facilitated violence extended abuse geographically and temporally. IPV experiences were associated with negative mental health outcomes that were intensified by the COVID-19 pandemic. Participants struggled to see themselves as legitimate victims of IPV. Although participants regretted being victims of violence, many saw their abusive relationship(s) as a learning experience to inform future relationships.

Discussion: Our findings suggest that 2S/LGBTQIA+ people may experience unique forms of identity abuse and may have difficulty recognizing their IPV experiences as abuse. Ensuring that comprehensive sexual health education is trauma-informed, anti-oppressive, and includes information about healthy relationship dynamics, 2S/LGBTQIA+ relationships, and IPV is critical.

Objectives: To investigate the experiences of women with kidney disease, residing in the United Kingdom (UK), living through the first 18 months of the COVID-19 pandemic with specific focus on preconception decision-making, family planning, and parenting.

Methods: We conducted a mixed-methods study, comprising an online survey and follow-up interviews, with UK-resident women aged 18-50.

Results: We received 431 surveys and conducted 30 interviews. Half (n = 221, 51%) of the survey respondents considered that COVID-19 influenced the quality of communication with healthcare professionals and 68% (n = 295) felt that the pandemic disrupted their support networks. Interview participants indicated that delayed and canceled appointments caused anxiety, grief, and loss of pregnancy options. Women's perception of themselves as (good) mothers as well as their capacity to have and raise a child, meet partners, and sustain healthy relationships was negatively affected by the "clinically extremely vulnerable" label. Women's trust in their healthcare was dismantled by miscommunication and variation in lockdown rules that caused confusion and increased worry. Women reported that COVID-19 contributed to postnatal depression, excessive concern over infant mortality, preoccupation over others following rules, and catastrophising.

Conclusion: Some women in the UK with chronic kidney disease lost or missed their opportunity to have children during the pandemic. Future pandemic planners need to look more holistically and longer term at what is and is not classed as an emergency, both in how services are reconfigured and how people with chronic conditions are identified, communicated with, and treated.

Introduction: The social and structural environments where people live are understudied in contraceptive research. We assessed if neighborhood measures of racialized socioeconomic deprivation are associated with contraceptive use in the United States.

Methods: We used restricted geographic data from four waves of the National Survey of Family Growth (2011-2019) limited to non-pregnant women ages 15-44 who had sex in the last 12 months. We characterized respondent neighborhoods (census tracts) with the Index of Concentration at the Extremes (ICE), a measure of spatial social polarization, into areas of concentrated privilege (predominantly white residents living on high incomes) and deprivation (predominantly people of color living on low incomes). We used multivariable binary and multinomial logistic regression with year fixed effects to estimate adjusted associations between ICE tertile and contraceptive use and method type. We also assessed for an interactive effect of ICE and health insurance type.

Results: Of the 14,396 respondents, 88.4% in neighborhoods of concentrated deprivation used any contraception, compared to 92.7% in the most privileged neighborhoods. In adjusted models, the predicted probability of using any contraception in neighborhoods of concentrated deprivation was 2.8 percentage points lower than in neighborhoods of concentrated privilege, 5.0 percentage points higher for barrier/coital dependent methods, and 4.3 percentage points lower for short-acting methods. Those with Medicaid were less likely to use any contraception than those with private insurance irrespective of neighborhood classification.

Conclusions: This study highlights the salience of structural factors for contraceptive use and the need for continued examination of structural oppressions to inform health policy.