Southeastern US anesthesia providers' perspectives on abortion provision: Inductive findings from a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVES: Health care providers, including anesthesia providers, hold varied personal views on abortion, which influences their involvement in multidisciplinary abortion care. We aimed to explore Southeastern US anesthesia providers' perspectives on abortion provision and factors impacting their decision to provide anesthesia for hospital-based induced abortion. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted in-depth, individual interviews with currently practicing anesthesia providers in the Southeastern United States. We recruited participants from regional anesthesiology conferences and via snowball sampling. A semistructured interview guide explored domains of obstetric experiences, standardized abortion cases, and personal abortion attitudes. We coded data iteratively and analyzed data thematically using inductive approaches with qualitative software. RESULTS: Fifteen participants completed interviews, at which point thematic saturation occurred. Participants represented a range of provider type and prior abortion experience. Participants weighed "personal and professional viewpoints" in considering their willingness to provide anesthesia care for hospital-based abortion. Many participants who personally disagreed with some abortion indications were still willing to provide anesthesia in those cases, some implicitly naming principles of medical ethics to justify differing professional and personal opinions. Participants also considered their "role in abortion decision-making": all participants reported that the abortion decision belongs to the patient or their obstetrician and not the anesthesia provider. CONCLUSIONS: Southeastern US anesthesia providers are influenced by multiple factors when considering their participation in hospital-based abortion care. Acknowledging differences in professional and personal viewpoints and identifying roles in abortion decision-making might be important to engaging anesthesia providers in abortion care, especially for high-risk medical or fetal indications. IMPLICATIONS: This original, qualitative study identified several inductive themes that characterize how Southeastern US anesthesia providers formulate their level of participation in hospital-based abortion care. Acknowledging differences in professional and personal viewpoints and identifying roles in abortion decision-making might facilitate interdisciplinary abortion care, especially for high-risk medical or fetal indications.

"The right thing to do would be to provide care and we can't": Provider experiences with Georgia's 22-week abortion ban.

OBJECTIVES: In 2015, the Georgia (US) legislature implemented a gestational limit, or "ban" on abortion at or beyond 22 weeks from the last menstrual period. In this study, we qualitatively examined abortion provider perspectives on the ban's impact on abortion care access and provision. STUDY DESIGN: Between May 2018 and September 2019, we conducted in-depth individual interviews with 20 abortion providers (clinicians, staff, and administrators) from four clinics in Georgia. Interviews explored perceptions of and experiences with the ban and its effects on abortion care. Team members coded transcripts to 100% agreement using an iterative, group consensus process, and conducted a thematic analysis. RESULTS: Participants reported strict adherence to the ban and also its negative consequences: additional labor plus service-delivery restrictions, legally constructed risks for providers, intrusion into the provider-patient relationship, and impact of limited services felt by patients and, thus, providers. Participants commonly mentioned disparities in the ban's impact and viewed the ban as disproportionately affecting people of color, those experiencing financial insecurity, and those with underlying medical conditions. Nonetheless, participants described a clear, unrelenting commitment to providing quality patient-centered care and dedication to and satisfaction in their work. CONCLUSIONS: Georgia's ban operates as legislative interference, adversely affecting the provision of quality, patient-centered abortion care, despite providers' resilience and commitment. These experiences in Georgia have timely and clear implications for the entire country following the Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v Wade, thus reducing care access and increasing negative health and social consequences and inequities for patients and communities on a national scale. IMPLICATIONS: Our findings from Georgia (US) indicate an urgent need for coordinated efforts to challenge the Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization decision and for proactive policies that protect access to later abortion care. Research that identifies strategies for supporting providers and patients faced with continuing restrictive legal environments is warranted.

Estimation of Multiyear Consequences for Abortion Access in Georgia Under a Law Limiting Abortion to Early Pregnancy.

Importance: Following the US Supreme Court ruling in Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization, Georgia's law limiting abortion to early pregnancy, House Bill 481 (HB481), was allowed to go into effect in July 2022. Objectives: To estimate anticipated multiyear effects of HB481, which prohibits abortions after detection of embryonic cardiac activity, on abortion incidence in Georgia, and to examine inequities by race, age, and socioeconomic status. Design, Setting, and Participants: This repeated cross-sectional analysis used abortion surveillance data from January 1, 2007, to December 31, 2017, to estimate future effects of HB481 on abortion care in Georgia, with a focus on the 2 most recent years of data (2016 and 2017). Abortion surveillance data were obtained from the 2007-2017 Georgia Department of Public Health's Induced Termination of Pregnancy files. Linear regression was used to estimate trends in abortions provided at less than 6 weeks' gestation and at 6 weeks' gestation or later in Georgia, and χ2 analyses were used to compare group differences by race, age, and educational attainment. Data were analyzed from July 26 to September 22, 2022. Exposures: HB481, Georgia's law limiting abortion to early pregnancy. Main Outcome and Measures: Weeks' gestation at abortion (<6 vs ≥6 weeks). Results: From January 1, 2007, to December 31, 2017, there were 360 972 reported abortions in Georgia, with an annual mean (SD) of 32 816 (1812) abortions. Estimates from 2016 to 2017 suggest that 3854 abortions in Georgia (11.6%) would likely meet eligibility requirements for abortion care under HB481. Fewer abortions obtained by Black patients (1943 [9.6%] vs 1280 [16.2%] for White patients), patients younger than 20 years (261 [9.1%] vs 168 [15.0%] for those 40 years and older), and patients with fewer years of education (392 [9.2%] with less than a high school diploma and 1065 [9.6%] with a high school diploma vs 2395 [13.5%] for those with some college) would likely meet eligibility requirements under HB481. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that Georgia's law limiting abortion to early pregnancy (HB481) would eliminate access to abortion for nearly 90% of patients in Georgia, and disproportionately harm patients who are Black, younger, and in lower socioeconomic status groups.

Perspectives on an early abortion ban in a restrictive US state: A qualitative exploration.

OBJECTIVES: To gain a deeper understanding of perspectives on abortion and early abortion bans in a restrictive US state. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a qualitative study using semistructured Zoom interviews with residents of the US state Georgia's 6th Congressional District. Potential participants first completed a screening tool to recruit people who held "middle-of-the-spectrum" views on abortion based on two abortion questions on a 5-point Likert scale. The interviews focused on participants' thoughts and feelings on abortion and Georgia's early abortion ban. We transcribed, coded, and analyzed the interviews, and present a subset of themes. RESULTS: We interviewed 28 people from March to May 2020. Participants often described holding complex views on abortion shaped by a range of lived experiences, values, and identities. They lamented the "black-and-white" nature of the national abortion discussion, which they felt oversimplified the issue and did not represent their views. Participants discussed the importance of experiences that allowed them to empathize with people who choose abortion, even when they personally felt they would make a different decision in a similar situation. Based on these experiences, many participants emphasized the importance of separating their own views on abortion from what needed to be regulated for others. However, participants often demonstrated a lack of understanding about the extent to which HB481 makes abortion inaccessible in Georgia. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that, even in states traditionally labeled as restrictive or hostile towards abortion, many people express an openness to understand others' experiences and hold complex and multifaceted views. IMPLICATIONS: Our laws and policies at the state level profoundly affect the practice of medicine and access to care. Our study furthers our understanding of how a sample of people in a restrictive US state think and feel about abortion and early abortion bans. These results can be used to support educational efforts, policies, and communication practices that better reflect the complex views of the public.

Levonorgestrel 52 mg intrauterine system efficacy and safety through 8 years of use.

BACKGROUND: Extending hormonal intrauterine system duration will allow users to have less need for procedures to provide long-term contraception. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the levonorgestrel 52 mg intrauterine system during years 7 and 8 of use. STUDY DESIGN: A total of 1751 nulliparous and multiparous participants aged 16 to 45 years enrolled in a phase 3, multicenter trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the use of the Liletta levonorgestrel 52 mg intrauterine system for up to 10 years. Participants aged 36 to 45 years at enrollment underwent safety evaluation only. After the first year, we evaluated participants every 6 months for intrauterine system location confirmation and urine pregnancy testing at each visit. We assessed the Pearl Indices in years 7 and 8 and the life-table analysis for cumulative pregnancy rates through 8 years of use. For the primary efficacy analyses, all participants aged 16 to 35 years at enrollment were included through year 6; years 7 and 8 included only users aged ≤39 years at the start of each use year. Safety outcomes were assessed in all participants regardless of duration of use. We assessed amenorrhea rates, defined as no bleeding or spotting in the 90 days before the end of the year. RESULTS: After intrauterine system placement, we followed 1568 participants aged 16 to 35 years and 146 participants aged 36 to 45 years. The 16- to 35-year-old participants included 986 (57.5%) nulliparous and 433 (25.3%) obese users. Overall, 569 participants started year 7, 478 completed year 7 (380 aged ≤39 years at beginning of year) and 343 completed year 8 (257 aged ≤39 years at beginning of year); 77 completed 10 years of use. Eleven pregnancies occurred over 8 years, 7 (64%) of which were ectopic. Two pregnancies occurred in year 7 (Pearl Index, 0.49; 95% confidence interval, 0.06-1.78), 1 in a participant with implantation 4 days after a desired removal; no pregnancies occurred in year 8. The cumulative life-table pregnancy rate in the primary efficacy population through year 8 was 1.32 (95% confidence interval, 0.69-2.51); without the postremoval pregnancy, the rate was 1.09 (95% confidence interval, 0.56-2.13). Two perforations (0.1%) occurred, none noted after year 1. Expulsion occurred in 71 (4.1%) participants overall, with 3 in year 7 and 2 in year 8. Pelvic infection was diagnosed in 16 (0.9%) participants during intrauterine system use, 1 each in years 7 and 8. Only 44 (2.6%) participants overall discontinued because of bleeding complaints (4 total in years 7 and 8) with rates per year of 0.1% to 0.5% for years 3 to 8. Amenorrhea rates were 39% at both years 7 and 8. CONCLUSION: The levonorgestrel 52 mg intrauterine system is highly effective over 8 years of use and has an excellent extended safety profile. This report details the longest period of efficacy and safety data for continuous use of a levonorgestrel 52 mg intrauterine system for contraception.

Racial and Ethnic Abortion Disparities Following Georgia's 22-Week Gestational Age Limit.

INTRODUCTION: Georgia's 2012 House Bill 954 (HB954) prohibiting abortions after 22 weeks from last menstrual period (LMP) has been associated with a significant decrease in abortions after 22 weeks. However, the policy's effects by race or ethnicity remain unexplored. We investigated whether changes in abortion numbers and ratios (per 1,000 live births) in Georgia after HB954 varied by race or ethnicity. METHODS: Using Georgia Department of Public Health induced terminations of pregnancy data from 2007 to 2017, we examined changes in number of abortions and abortion ratios (per 1,000 live births) by race and ethnicity following HB954 implementation. RESULTS: After full implementation of HB954 in 2015, the number of abortions and abortion ratios at or after 22 weeks (from last menstrual period) decreased among White (bNumber = -261.83, p < .001; bRatio = -3.31, p < .001), Black (bNumber = -416.17, p < .001; bRatio = -8.84, p < .001), non-Hispanic (bNumber = -667.00, p = .001; bRatio = -5.82, p < .001), and Hispanic (bNumber = -56.25, p = .002; bRatio = -2.44, p = .002) people. However, the ratio of abortions before 22 weeks increased for Black people (bLessThan22Weeks = 44.06, p = .028) and remained stable for White (bLessThan22Weeks = -6.78, p = .433), Hispanic (bLessThan22Weeks = 21.27, p = .212), and non-Hispanic people (bLessThan22Weeks = 26.93, p = .172). CONCLUSION: The full implementation of HB954 had differential effects by race/ethnicity and gestational age. Although abortion at 22 weeks or more decreased for all groups, abortion at less than 22 weeks increased among Black people. Additional research should elucidate the possible causes, consequences, and reactions to differential effects of abortion restrictions by race and ethnicity.

Utilization and Comparative Effectiveness of Uterine Artery Embolization versus Hysterectomy for Severe Postpartum Hemorrhage: A National Inpatient Sample Study.

PURPOSE: To identify differences in mortality or length of hospital stay for mothers treated with uterine artery embolization (UAE) or hysterectomy for severe postpartum hemorrhage (PPH), as well as to analyze whether geographic or clinical determinants affected the type of therapy received. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This National Inpatient Sample study from 2005 to 2017 included all patients with live-birth deliveries. Severe PPH was defined as PPH that required transfusion, hysterectomy, or UAE. Propensity score weighting-adjusted demographic, maternal, and delivery risk factors were used to assess mortality and prolonged hospital stay. RESULTS: Of 9.8 million identified live births, PPH occurred in 31.0 per 1,000 cases. The most common intervention for PPH was transfusion (116.4 per 1,000 cases of PPH). Hysterectomy was used more frequently than UAE (20.4 vs 12.9 per 1,000 cases). The following factors predicted that hysterectomy would be used more commonly than UAE: previous cesarean delivery, breech fetal position, placenta previa, transient hypertension during pregnancy without pre-eclampsia, pre-existing hypertension without pre-eclampsia, pre-existing hypertension with pre-eclampsia, unspecified maternal hypertension, and gestational diabetes (all P < .001). Delivery risk factors associated with greater utilization of hysterectomy over UAE included postterm pregnancy, premature rupture of membranes, cervical laceration, forceps vaginal delivery, and shock (all P < .001). There was no difference in mortality between hysterectomy and UAE. After balancing demographic, maternal, and delivery risk factors, the odds of prolonged hospital stay were 0.38 times lower with UAE than hysterectomy (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Despite similar mortality and shorter hospital stays, UAE is used far less than hysterectomy in the management of severe PPH.

Hormonal Contraception: Systemic Estrogen and Progestin Preparations.

Combined hormonal contraception (CHC) are short-acting, reversible methods containing both estrogen and progestin. Available CHC methods include combined oral contraceptives, transdermal patches, and vaginal rings. The combined oral contraceptive remains the most commonly used contraceptive method in the United States. The general principles of CHC will be reviewed, including mechanism of action and effectiveness. Unless otherwise stated, these principles apply to all CHCs. When discussing clinical studies and specific considerations related only to pills, patches, or rings, the method(s) will be specified. Words that specify sex are used when discussing studies in which sex was specified.

Contraception for high risk patients.

In the context of medically complicated pregnancies, a "high risk patient" is an individual who is at increased risk for having a complicated pregnancy. These patients often experience limited contraceptive counseling and access, despite the fact that most effective contraceptive methods are associated with less risk than that of pregnancy. Free evidence-based resources are available to assist healthcare providers in discerning fact from myth about the risks of contraception. This review covers all available contraceptive methods, with particular focus on the benefits, risks, and attributes most relevant to high risk patients as well as the benefits and risks of initiating contraception post-pregnancy.

Gabapentin as an adjunct to paracervical block for perioperative pain management for first-trimester uterine aspiration: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Pain management approaches during uterine aspiration vary, which include local anesthetic, oral analgesics, moderate sedation, deep sedation, or a combination of approaches. For local anesthetic approaches specifically, we continue to have suboptimal pain control. Gabapentin as an adjunct to pain management has proven to be beneficial in gynecologic surgery. We sought to evaluate the impact of gabapentin on perioperative pain during surgical management of first-trimester abortion or early pregnancy loss with uterine aspiration under local anesthesia. OBJECTIVE: We hypothesized that adding gabapentin to local anesthesia will reduce perioperative and postoperative pain associated with uterine aspiration. Secondary outcomes included tolerability of gabapentin and postoperative pain, nausea, vomiting, and anxiety. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a randomized double-blinded placebo-controlled trial of gabapentin 600 mg given 1 to 2 hours preoperatively among subjects receiving a first-trimester uterine aspiration under paracervical block in an outpatient ambulatory surgery center. There were 111 subjects randomized. The primary outcome was pain at time of uterine aspiration as measured on a 100-mm visual analog scale. Secondary outcomes included pain at other perioperative time points. To assess changes in pain measures, an intention to treat mixed effects model was fit with treatment groups (gabapentin vs control) as a between-subjects factor and time point as a within-subjects factor plus their interaction term. Because of a non-normal distribution of pain scores, the area under the curve was calculated for secondary outcomes with comparison of groups utilizing Mann-Whitney U tests. RESULTS: Among the 111 randomized, most subjects were Black or African American (69.4%), mean age was 26 years (±5.5), and mean gestational age was 61.3 days (standard deviation, 14.10). Mean pain scores at time of uterine aspiration were 66.77 (gabapentin) vs 71.06 (placebo), with a mean difference of -3.38 (P=.51). There were no significant changes in pain score preoperatively or intraoperatively. Subjects who received gabapentin had significantly lower levels of pain at 10 minutes after surgery (mean difference [standard error (SE)]=-13.0 [-5.0]; P=.01) and 30 minutes after surgery (mean difference [SE]=-10.8 [-5.1]; P=.03) compared with subjects who received placebo. Median nausea scores and incidence of emesis pre- and postoperatively did not differ between groups. Similarly, anxiety scores did not differ between groups, before or after the procedure. At 10 and 30 minutes after the procedure, most participants reported no side effects or mild side effects, and this did not differ between groups. CONCLUSION: Preoperative gabapentin did not reduce pain during uterine aspiration. However, it did reduce postoperative pain, which may prove to be a desired attribute of its use, particularly in cases where postoperative pain may be a greater challenge.

Abortion Trends in Georgia Following Enactment of the 22-Week Gestational Age Limit, 2007-2017.

Objectives. To measure trends before, during, and after implementation of Georgia House Bill 954, a limit on abortion at 22 or more weeks of gestation passed in 2012, in total abortions and abortions by gestational age and state residence.Methods. We analyzed aggregate year-level induced termination of pregnancy data from the Georgia Department of Public Health from 2007 to 2017. We used linear regression to describe annual trends in the number of abortions and χ2 analyses to describe changes in proportions of abortions by gestational age (< 20 weeks, 20-21 weeks, and > 21 weeks) across policy implementation periods (before, partial, and full implementation) for Georgia residents and nonresidents.Results. Although the total number of abortions and abortions at 21 weeks or less remained stable from 2007 to 2017, the number of abortions at more than 21 weeks declined (P = .02). The decline in number of abortions at more than 21 weeks was steeper for nonresidents (31/year; Β = -31.3; P = .02) compared with Georgia residents (14/year; Β = -13.9; P = .06).Conclusions. Findings suggest that implementation of Georgia's 22-week gestational age limit has effectively limited access to needed abortion services in Georgia and beyond. (Am J Public Health. Published online ahead of print May 21, 2020: e1-e5. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2020.305653).

Evaluation of Human Papillomavirus Vaccination After Pharmacist-Led Intervention: A Pilot Project in an Ambulatory Clinic at a Large Academic Urban Medical Center.

OBJECTIVES: Despite the safety and efficacy of the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine, many persons are still not receiving it. The purpose of this pilot project was to evaluate the number of first doses of the 9-valent HPV (9vHPV) vaccination administered after a pharmacist-led intervention in the Adult Family Planning Clinic at Grady Health System (GHS), a large academic urban medical center in Atlanta, Georgia. METHODS: The pilot project had 3 phases: pre-intervention (November 15, 2016, through March 31, 2017), active intervention (November 15, 2017, through December 29, 2017), and post-intervention (December 30, 2017, through March 31, 2018). The pre-intervention phase was used as a historical control. The active intervention phase consisted of pharmacist interventions in the clinic and patient and health care provider education. The post-intervention phase evaluated the durability of pharmacist-led interventions performed and education provided during the active phase. RESULTS: Eighty-nine first-dose 9vHPV vaccines (of the 3-dose series) were administered to young adults aged 18-26 during the project period (November 15, 2017, through March 31, 2018); none were administered during the pre-intervention phase. Of 89 patients who received a first 9vHPV vaccine dose, 20 patients also received a second 9vHPV vaccine dose. During the project period, 166 doses of 9vHPV vaccine (first, second, or third doses) were administered. CONCLUSION: This pharmacist-led intervention led to an increase in the number of young adult patients receiving their first dose of the 9vHPV vaccination series. With the support of other health care providers, pharmacist-led initiatives can expand vaccine-related health literacy and facilitate access to immunization services.

Brief Report: Impact of PrEP Training for Family Planning Providers on HIV Prevention Counseling and Patient Interest in PrEP in Atlanta, Georgia.

BACKGROUND: Safety net family planning (FP) clinics provide vital care for women in high HIV-burden areas and may be ideal pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) delivery sites. Yet, many FP providers lack knowledge about PrEP. SETTING: Four safety net FP clinics in Atlanta, Georgia. METHODS: We provided a 1.5-hour PrEP informational training for 28 providers working in these sites. To assess the training's impact on PrEP counseling, we enrolled 500 female patients after training (47% ≤ 28 years; 69% black; 12% Hispanic) and determined their PrEP indication based on CDC guidelines. We conducted a postvisit survey to assess provider counseling and patients' interest in PrEP and acceptance of off-site PrEP referral. RESULTS: From pre-training to post-training, provider PrEP knowledge and confidence to identify women who may benefit from PrEP significantly increased. Only 19% of women knew about PrEP before the visit. Among 376 sexually active women, 29% had risk consistent with PrEP indication. Among PrEP-indicated women, 66% reported the provider discussed PrEP, 29% were interested in taking PrEP, but only 18% accepted off-site PrEP referral. Most (76%) were more willing to take PrEP if provided by the FP clinic. CONCLUSIONS: After a brief PrEP training, most women with HIV-risk indicators received PrEP counseling during their visits. Once counseled, women expressed interest if it were offered at the FP clinic rather than through off-site referral. Findings highlight the potential impact that PrEP capacity building within safety net FP clinics in high HIV-burden areas may have on PrEP scale-up for women.

Patient recommendations for PrEP information dissemination at family planning clinics in Atlanta, Georgia.

OBJECTIVE: Family planning (FP) clinics are an ideal setting to disseminate information about pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP), but little is known about women's preferences for learning about PrEP in this setting. STUDY DESIGN: We surveyed 500 women seeking care at 4 FP clinics in Atlanta. Before their provider visit, participants completed an HIV-risk screener. After, we asked participants about the HIV prevention counseling they received and how clinics could share information about PrEP. We performed descriptive analyses on demographics, HIV risk, and PrEP awareness/interest, and conducted thematic analysis on open-ended responses. RESULTS: Only 18% knew about PrEP before the study; 28% of 376 sexually-active women had≥1 risk indicator consistent with PrEP eligibility. Three hundred forty seven women (69%) shared suggestions about how clinics should share PrEP information. We categorized suggestions into 4 themes - Advertising, Conversations, Awareness and Access. Participants (n=150) suggested clinics should advertise PrEP via brochures, posters, texts, or emails; 134 wanted providers to talk to patients about PrEP. Several (n=71) suggested sharing PrEP information broadly in the community and with other clinics/providers; others (n=11) wanted improved access to PrEP services. CONCLUSIONS: Our results demonstrate overwhelming patient interest in learning more about PrEP through educational materials and directly from FP providers. Women were vocal about increasing PrEP awareness in the community, particularly among populations especially at risk for HIV (e.g., teens). These suggestions can be translated into actionable steps FP clinics can take to increase PrEP awareness and expand their reach to benefit women at risk for HIV. IMPLICATIONS: High HIV rates among women in the South make it imperative to increase awareness of PrEP among women. Atlanta women seeking care in FP clinics valued learning about PrEP and recommended feasible strategies for disseminating information about PrEP in community settings, the clinic or during patient-provider discussion.

A Survey of Family Planning Training, Knowledge, and Practices Among Health Care Providers Within the Military Health System at Joint Base Lewis-McChord.

INTRODUCTION: Within the active duty U.S. military population, the age-adjusted unintended pregnancy rate is higher than the national average. Unplanned pregnancy within the military impacts individual and unit medical readiness. Contraceptive education and availability are means to reduce unintended pregnancy rates; health care providers are key facilitators in provision of contraception. Understanding provider knowledge and practices related to contraceptive provision may identify strengths and gaps in order to provide focal points for sustainment or improvement in family planning practices. The purpose of this study was to assess family planning knowledge, training, and practices among health care providers serving military and dependent beneficiaries within the military health care system at Fort Lewis, Washington. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This was a cross-sectional survey of health care providers on Joint Base Lewis-McChord in Tacoma, Washington who deliver health care services to U.S. uniformed service members and their dependents in varied settings, including outpatient clinics and a tertiary care center. The survey included questions regarding prior contraceptive training, and current contraceptive knowledge and practices. Survey results were evaluated using descriptive and bivariate analyses. The study was approved by both Institutional Review Boards at Emory University and at Madigan Army Medical Center. RESULTS: Overall, 79 eligible health care providers completed the survey. Eighty-six percent of women's health providers consistently ("always or most of the time") provided family planning services to female service members, compared with 38% of primary care providers. Women's health providers were more likely to counsel by method effectiveness and adapt their counseling to consider patients' reproductive life plans. There were no differences between provider type in considering service members' deployment status during contraceptive counseling. Overall, providers identified the correct effectiveness of long-acting contraceptive methods, but tended to overestimate the effectiveness of short-acting methods. CONCLUSIONS: Family planning services available to service members may be improved through enhanced provider education, targeting efficacy-based counseling and identification of barriers to access and provision of long-acting reversible contraceptive methods.

Postpartum intrauterine device placement: a patient-friendly option.

Women in the United States are increasingly choosing an intrauterine device (IUD) for contraception. Since the postpartum period is an important time to consider a patient's need for contraception, offering postpartum IUD placement is considered best practice. Effective implementation of postpartum IUD placement occurs within a context of shared decision making wherein patients are given full information about all options and guided to methods that best fit their lifestyle. Within this context, both the non-hormonal and hormonal IUDs are safe, highly effective, well tolerated, and convenient options. National guidelines support the placement of IUDs, whether immediate (within 10 min of placental delivery) or early postpartum (after 10 min and before 4 weeks after placental delivery), for breastfeeding or non-breastfeeding women. Studies have noted increased IUD expulsion rates, but equivalent IUD usage rates with immediate or early postpartum placement. Postpartum placement requires additional skills that can be easily taught. Finally, successful implementation of a postpartum IUD placement program can be accomplished in hospitals using a team-based approach.

Contraception for midlife women: a review.

Family planning represents a key component of reproductive health care. Accordingly, the provision of contraception must span the reproductive age spectrum, including perimenopause. The risk of pregnancy is decreased, but not trivial, among women over 40 years of age. Evidence-based guidelines for contraceptive use can assist clinicians in counseling their patients in this population. Intrauterine contraception is one of the most effective methods and is safe to use in midlife women with few exceptions. Progestin-only contraception is another safe option for most midlife women because it is not associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular complications. Combined (estrogen-containing) contraception can be safely used by midlife women who do not have cardiovascular risk factors. Unique noncontraceptive benefits for this population include: improvement in abnormal uterine bleeding, decreased hot flashes, and decreased cancer risk. Finally, guidelines state that contraception can be used by midlife women without medical contraindications until the age of menopause, at which time they may consider transition to systemic hormone therapy.