Contraceptive care in the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic: A social media survey of contraceptive access, telehealth use and telehealth quality.

OBJECTIVES: To examine demographic, socioeconomic, and regional differences in contraceptive access, differences between telehealth and in-person contraception visits, and telehealth quality in the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic. STUDY DESIGN: We surveyed reproductive-age women about contraception visits during the COVID-19 pandemic via social media in July 2020 and January 2021. We used multivariable regression to examine relationships between age, racial/ethnic identity, educational attainment, income, insurance type, region, and COVID-19 related hardship, and ability to obtain a contraceptive appointment, telehealth vs in-person visits, and telehealth quality scores. RESULTS: Among 2031 respondents seeking a contraception visit, 1490 (73.4%) reported any visit, of which 530 (35.6%) were telehealth. In adjusted analyses, lower odds of any visit was associated with Hispanic/Latinx and Mixed race/Other identity (aOR 0.59 [0.37-0.94], aOR 0.36 [0.22-0.59], respectively), the South, Midwest, Northeast (aOR 0.63 [0.47-0.85], aOR 0.64 [0.46-0.90], aOR 0.52 [CI 0.36-0.75], respectively), no insurance (aOR 0.63 [0.43-0.91]), greater COVID-19 hardship (aOR 0.52 [0.31-0.87]), and earlier pandemic timing (January 2021 vs July 2020 aOR 2.14 [1.69-2.70]). Respondents from the Midwest and South had lower odds of telehealth vs in-person care (aOR 0.63 [0.44-0.88], aOR 0.54 [0.40-0.72], respectively). Hispanic/Latinx respondents and those in the Midwest had lower odds of high telehealth quality (aOR 0.37 [0.17-0.80], aOR 0.58 [0.35-0.95], respectively). CONCLUSIONS: We found inequities in contraceptive care access, less telehealth use for contraception visits in the South and Midwest, and lower telehealth quality among Hispanic/Latinx people during the COVID-19 pandemic. Future research should focus on telehealth access, quality, and patients' preferences. IMPLICATIONS: Historically marginalized groups have faced disproportionate barriers to contraceptive care, and telehealth for contraceptive care has not been employed equitably during the COVID-19 pandemic. Though telehealth has the potential to improve access to care, inequitable implementation could exacerbate existing disparities.

Predictors of COVID-19 Vaccination Likelihood Among Reproductive-Aged Women in the United States.

OBJECTIVES: Vaccination for COVID-19 is an effective method of preventing complications; however, studies suggest that public attitudes toward the vaccine are heterogeneous. The objective of our study was to identify predictors for low likelihood of COVID-19 vaccination among women in the United States and determine whether reasons for low intention were modified by race, ethnicity, or other characteristics to better understand the factors that shape attitudes toward the COVID-19 vaccine and help inform multilevel interventions. METHODS: In January 2021, we used social media to recruit a cross-section of reproductive-aged women in the United States (N = 5269). Our primary outcome was self-reported low vaccination likelihood (responses of unlikely or very unlikely on a 5-item scale). Our secondary outcome was concerns influencing vaccination decision that participants selected from a list of 19 items. We estimated multivariable logistic regression models and controlled for respondents' sociodemographic characteristics. RESULTS: Overall, race and ethnicity, educational attainment, health insurance type, annual household income, partnership status, and US region were associated with low vaccine likelihood. The adjusted odds of reporting low likelihood were 1.83 (95% CI, 1.45-2.32) times greater among non-Hispanic Black than among non-Hispanic White participants. Among pregnant or postpartum participants, breastfeeding status was the strongest predictor (adjusted odds ratio = 2.77; 95% CI, 2.02-3.79). CONCLUSIONS: Vaccine hesitancy and concerns may exacerbate existing COVID-19 health disparities in racial and ethnic groups and highlight the need to target messaging to specific populations, including pregnant and breastfeeding women, because these populations are at high risk for COVID-19 complications.

"My 9 to 5 Job Is Birth Work": A Case Study of Two Compensation Approaches for Community Doula Care.

With the increased policy emphasis on promoting doula care to advance birth equity in the United States, there is a vital need to identify sustainable and equitable approaches for compensation of community doulas, who serve clients experiencing the greatest barriers to optimal pregnancy-related outcomes. This case study explores two different approaches for compensating doulas (contractor versus hourly employment with benefits) utilized by SisterWeb San Francisco Community Doula Network in San Francisco, California. We conducted qualitative interviews with SisterWeb doulas in 2020 and 2021 and organizational leaders in 2020. Overall, leaders and doulas reported that the contractor approach, in which doulas were paid a flat fee per client, did not adequately compensate doulas, who regularly attend trainings and provide additional support for their clients (e.g., referrals to promote housing and food security). Additionally, this approach did not provide doulas with healthcare benefits, which was especially concerning during the COVID-19 pandemic. As hourly, benefited employees, doulas experienced a greater sense of financial security and wellbeing from receiving consistent pay, compensation for all time worked, and benefits such as health insurance and sick leave, allowing some to dedicate themselves to birth work. Our study suggests that efforts to promote community doula care must integrate structural solutions to provide appropriate compensation and benefits to doulas, simultaneously advancing birth equity and equitable labor conditions for community doulas.

COVID-19's impact on contraception experiences: Exacerbation of structural inequities in women's health.

INTRODUCTION: Structural inequities may impact the relationship between COVID-19 and access to contraception. METHODS: In July 2020 and January 2021, we used social media to survey 2 samples of women of reproductive age who had not been surgically sterilized and were not currently pregnant about their experiences seeking contraception. We explore whether experiences differed for people experiencing social and/or economic disadvantage due to COVID-19, using multivariable logistic regression to control for age, education and income. RESULTS: In July 2020, 51.5% of respondents who sought contraception (total N = 3064) reported barriers to care compared to 55.3% in January 2021 (total N = 2276). A larger percent (14% in July 2020 and 22% in Jan 2021) reported not using their preferred method of contraception due to COVID-19. Individuals experiencing income loss (OR = 1.61, 95% CI 1.27-2.04 early in the COVID-19 pandemic and OR = 1.58, 1.21-2.06 mid COVID-19 pandemic) and hunger (OR = 1.73, 1.24-2.40 early and OR = 2.02, 1.55-2.64 mid-COVID-19 pandemic) were more likely to report they would be using a different method if not for COVID-19, compared to respondents without income loss or hunger. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 has complicated access to contraception, especially for disadvantaged populations. IMPLICATIONS: Efforts are needed to ensure access to contraception despite the COVID-19 epidemic, especially for disadvantaged populations.

Modesty and Security: Attributes Associated with Comfort and Willingness to Engage in Telelactation.

The objectives were to identify conditions under which mothers may be willing to use telelactation and explore associations between participant characteristics, willingness, and beliefs regarding telelactation use. Mothers 2-8 weeks postpartum were recruited from two Florida maternal care sites and surveyed to assess demographics, breastfeeding initiation, and potential telelactation use. Analyses included descriptive statistics and logistic regression models. Of the 88 participants, most were white, married, earned less than USD 50,000 per year, had access to technology, and were willing to use telelactation if it was free (80.7%) or over a secure server (63.6%). Fifty-six percent were willing to use telelactation if it involved feeding the baby without a cover, but only 45.5% were willing if their nipples may be seen. Those with higher odds of willingness to use telelactation under these modesty conditions were experienced using videochat, white, married, and of higher income. Mothers with security concerns had six times the odds of being uncomfortable with telelactation compared to mothers without concerns. While telelactation can improve access to critical services, willingness to use telelactation may depend on conditions of use and sociodemographics. During the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond, these findings offer important insights for lactation professionals implementing virtual consultations.