Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health最新文献

Objective: This study analyzes the economic impacts of Ohio's Senate Bill 23, which would ban abortion care after fetal cardiac activity is detected.

Methods: Leveraging previous research and publicly available datasets, a unique set of calculations were developed to determine abortion outcomes, individual costs, and public costs in three scenarios in which abortion care is banned in Ohio. Scenario 1 assumes that all abortion care is sought out-of-state. Scenario 2 assumes that all pregnancies result in a birth. Scenario 3 assumes that pregnancies either result in receiving out-of-state abortion care or result in a birth.

Results: The total additional economic impact of restricted abortion access in Ohio likely ranges between $98.8 million and $118.4 million, but could be up to $551.4 million per year.

Conclusion: Regardless of the three scenarios analyzed, restrictions to accessing abortion care result in negative economic impacts for both individuals and the state. Several policy recommendations are proposed for consideration by policymakers and communities.

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.

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.

Background: In the United States (U.S.), adolescents and young adults are increasingly using contraception, including long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) [e.g., subdermal implants (e.g., Nexplanon®) and intrauterine devices (IUDs)]; however, access to LARC device removal may be difficult for adolescents and young adults. Reproductive justice is the right to bodily autonomy, have children, not have children, and safely parent the children we have.

Methods: In this commentary, we discuss that while the specialties of family medicine and obstetrics and gynecology have incorporated the principles of reproductive justice into their contraceptive care, further work is needed to ingrain this philosophy into pediatrics training. Since LARC devices are historically only removable by health care providers, pediatricians may act as gatekeepers to removing LARC, obstructing the reproductive justice of adolescents and young adults.

Results: We describe that adolescents and young adults in the U.S. face unique barriers to LARC removal including limited access to the health care system, potential breaches in confidentiality, and provider bias. These barriers may lead adolescents and young adults to remove their own LARC device when experiencing unwanted side effects or desiring pregnancy. While IUD self-removal is a safe and accessible option, safety and efficacy data on subdermal implant self-removal is currently limited.

Conclusion: In order to promote reproductive justice in adolescents and young adults, we recommend that (1) pediatricians should address potential barriers to LARC removal prior to insertion, (2) pediatricians must offer unbiased LARC removal, (3) pediatricians who place LARC must be knowledgeable about complicated LARC removal, and (4) pediatricians should discuss LARC self-removal options with adolescents and young adults.

Background: Adolescents with psychiatric disorders have high rates of unintended pregnancy and experience barriers to accessing sexual and reproductive health (SRH) care. Outpatient psychiatry visits are potential opportunities to connect adolescents to SRH care. This study informs the development of the Link2BC intervention which links adolescents in outpatient psychiatry care to SRH care.

Methods: We conducted group interviews with adolescents (3 groups, 7 total participants) and caregivers (3 groups, 9 total participants) and individual interviews with 8 psychiatry providers who received or provided outpatient psychiatric treatment in clinics in a pediatric hospital in a city in the Midwestern United States. We asked questions about the acceptability of Link2BC, potential implementation needs, and implementation determinants. Using consensus-building techniques, two coders analyzed transcriptions using a codebook informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research 2.0.

Results: Participants agreed on the need for interventions that expand access to SRH care. Adolescents emphasized that services should be confidential and accessible and were open to their psychiatrists introducing SRH topics during appointments. Providers expressed preference for training and clear workflows. Participants agreed that psychiatry providers could serve as liaisons between adolescents and their caregivers to facilitate conversations about contraception. Participants had concerns about time constraints during visits but mentioned few other barriers to the intervention.

Conclusion: This study demonstrates the acceptability of connecting adolescents in outpatient psychiatry care to contraceptive counseling and informs the refinement and implementation of Link2BC. Integrating contraception counseling in outpatient psychiatry settings is an innovative approach to prevent unintended pregnancy among adolescents by increasing access to SRH care services.

Context: In the United States (US) men who undergo vasectomy and/or vasectomy reversal (vasovasotomy) are likely to pay out-of-pocket for these procedures. We characterized the publicly disclosed pricing of both procedures with a focus on variability in self-pay prices.

Methods: We queried all US hospitals for publicly disclosed prices of vasectomy and vasovasotomy. We assessed interhospital variability in self-pay pricing and compared hospitals charging high (≥75th percentile) and low (≤25th percentile) self-pay prices for either procedure. We also examined trends in pricing after the 2022 US Supreme Court decision that allowed individual states to ban abortion.

Results: Of 6692 hospitals, 1375 (20.5%) and 281 (4.2%) disclosed self-pay prices for vasectomy and vasovasotomy, respectively. There was a 17-fold difference between the 10th and 90th percentile self-pay prices for vasectomy ($421-$7147) and a 39-fold difference for vasovasotomy ($446-$17,249). Compared with hospitals charging low (≤25th percentile) self-pay prices for vasectomy or vasovasotomy, hospitals charging high (≥75th percentile) prices were larger (median 150 vs. 59 beds, p < 0.001) and more likely to be for-profit (31.2% vs. 7.8%, p < 0.001), academic-affiliated (52.7% vs. 23.1%, p < 0.001), and located in an urban zip code (70.1% vs. 41.3%, p < 0.001). From October 2022 to April 2023, the median self-pay price of vasectomy increased by 10% (from $1667 to $1832) while the median self-pay price of vasovasotomy decreased by 16% (from $3309 to $2786).

Conclusion: We found large variability in self-pay pricing for vasectomy and vasectomy reversal, which may serve as a barrier to the accessibility of male reproductive care.