Required Mental Health Evaluation Before Initiating Gender-Affirming Hormones: Trans and Nonbinary Perspectives.

Purpose: Gender-affirming hormones (hormones)-the use of sex hormones to induce desired secondary sex characteristics in transgender and nonbinary (TGNB) individuals-are vital health care for many TGNB people. Some hormone providers require a letter from a mental health provider before hormone initiation. We explore the perspectives of TGNB individuals regarding the impact of the letter requirement on their experience of care. Methods: We conducted semistructured interviews with 21 TGNB individuals who have sought or are receiving hormones. We purposively sampled respondents who were (n=12) and were not (n=8) required to provide a letter. An Advisory Board of transgender individuals guided the methodology. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and coded both inductively and deductively. Results: We identified three themes related to the letter requirement: (1) Mental health: While participants appreciated the importance of therapy, the letter requirement did not serve this purpose; (2) Trans identity: The process of obtaining a letter created doubt in participants' own transness, along with a resistance to the pathologization and conflation of mental illness with transness; and (3) Care relationships: The letter requirement negatively impacted the patient-provider relationship. Participants felt the need to self-censor or to perform a version of transness they thought the provider expected; this process decreased their trust in care professionals. Conclusion: A letter requirement did not improve mental health and had several negative consequences. Removal of this requirement will improve access to hormones and may paradoxically improve mental health.

Incidence of Newborn Drug Testing and Variations by Birthing Parent Race and Ethnicity Before and After Recreational Cannabis Legalization.

Importance: Thirty-seven US states and the District of Columbia mandate reporting newborns with suspected prenatal substance exposure to the state, and punitive policies that link prenatal substance exposure to newborn drug testing (NDT) may lead to disproportionate reporting of Black parents to Child Protective Services. The impact of recreational cannabis legalization on racial disproportionality in NDT is unknown. Objectives: To examine variations in the incidence and results of NDT by birthing parent race and ethnicity, variables associated with variation, and changes after statewide legalization of recreational cannabis. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study was conducted from 2014 to 2020 with 26 366 live births to 21 648 birthing people who received prenatal care at an academic medical center in the Midwestern United States. Data were analyzed from June 2021 to August 2022. Exposures: Variables included birthing parent age, race, ethnicity, marital status, zip code, insurance type, prenatal and newborn diagnoses codes, and prenatal urine drug test orders and results. Main Outcome and Measures: The primary outcome was an NDT order. Secondary outcomes were substances detected. Results: Among 26 366 newborns of 21 648 birthing people (mean [SD] age at delivery, 30.5 [5.2] years), most birthing parents were White (15 338 [71.6%]), were non-Hispanic (20 125 [93.1%]), and had private insurance coverage (16 159 [74.8%]). The incidence of NDT ordering was 4.7% overall (1237 newborns). Clinicians ordered more NDTs for Black compared with White newborns (207 of 2870 [7.3%] vs 335 of 17 564 [1.9%]; P < .001) when the birthing parent had no prenatal urine drug test, a presumably low-risk group. Overall, 471 of 1090 NDTs (43.3%) were positive for only tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). NDTs were more likely to be positive for opioids in White compared with Black newborns (153 of 693 [22.2%] vs 29 of 308 [9.4%]; P < .001) and more likely to be positive for THC in Black compared with White newborns (207 of 308 [67.2%] vs 359 of 693 [51.8%]; P < .001). Differences remained consistent after state recreational cannabis legalization in 2018. Newborn drug tests were more likely to be positive for THC after legalization vs before legalization (248 of 360 [68.9%] vs 366 of 728 [50.3%]; P < .001) with no significant interaction with race and ethnicity groups. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, clinicians ordered NDTs more frequently for Black newborns when no drug testing was done during pregnancy. These findings call for further exploration of how structural and institutional racism contribute to disproportionate testing and subsequent Child Protective Services investigation, surveillance, and criminalization of Black parents.

Initiating gender-affirming hormones for transgender and non-binary people: A qualitative study of providers' perspectives on requiring mental health evaluations.

OBJECTIVE: Gender-affirming hormones (GAH)-the use of sex hormones to induce desired secondary sex characteristics in transgender individuals-is vital healthcare for many transgender people. Among prescribers of GAH, there is debate regarding the value of a universal requirement for an evaluation by a mental health provider prior to GAH initiation. The purpose of this qualitative study was to describe the range of attitudes and approaches to mental health evaluation among GAH providers in the United States. We analyzed the providers' attitudes and base our recommendations on this analysis. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 18 healthcare providers who prescribe GAH across the United States. Participants were purposefully recruited using professional networks and snowball sampling to include those who require mental health evaluation and those who do not. We adapted domains from the Theoretical Domains Framework-a framework for understanding influences on health professional behavior-to inform the interviews and analysis. Guided by these domains, we iteratively coded text and identified theoretical relationships among the categories. RESULTS: While some felt a universal requirement for mental health "clearance" was necessary for the identification of appropriate candidates for GAH, others described this requirement as a form of "gatekeeping" that limits access to care. Themes we identified included providers' ability to ascertain gender identity; concern about mental illness; GAH provider and mental health provider expertise; and provider roles. All providers appreciated the potential advantages of mental health support during GAH treatment. CONCLUSION: Providers in our study practice on a continuum of care rather than adhering to strict rules about the requirement for mental health evaluation prior to GAH treatment. Where they fall on this continuum is influenced primarily by their perceptions of transgender identity and transition, and their interpretation of risk for significant mental illness and its association with transness. Providers who required universal evaluation by a mental health professional tended to hold essentialist, medicalized, and binary ideas of gender and transness.

Contraceptive decisions among individuals with medical conditions in Michigan, USA: A qualitative explanatory model informed by the Health Belief Model and the principle of respect for patient autonomy.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to qualitatively describe the contraceptive experiences of individuals with medical conditions and develop an explanatory model of contraceptive decision-making in this context. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted 41 interviews with pre-menopausal patients with a range of medical conditions from Michigan, United States. We identified themes through open coding and comparative analysis until we reached theoretical saturation. We analyzed the themes in the context of the Health Belief Model constructs and patient autonomy. To develop the explanatory model, we qualitatively mapped out relationships between constructs and how they informed contraceptive-decision making. RESULTS: The model posits that contraceptive decisions are affected by the perceived impact of chronic disease on pregnancy, parenting, and contraceptive options. These perceptions were strongly affected by others, particularly health care providers (HCPs). Most worried that pregnancy could threaten their health, fetal health, or ability to parent. Active symptoms of chronic disease (e.g., pain, fatigue) amplified this perceived threat. Patients appreciated when their HCPs acknowledged, rather than dismissed, their concerns about contraceptive side effects that affected their chronic disease symptoms and management (e.g., headaches, worsening mood). Patients with medical contraindications to hormonal contraception and preferred to use coital-dependent methods (e.g., condoms) did not feel supported to do so by their HCPs. Patients who were Black, young, living on low-incomes, or considered medically "high risk" felt discriminated against by HCPs who limited or coerced their contraceptive decisions. CONCLUSIONS: This explanatory model synthesizes factors that underlie, constrain, or promote reproductive and contraceptive decisions and autonomy for individuals with medical conditions. IMPLICATIONS: This new explanatory model can guide the development and evaluation of interventions that support the contraceptive decisions and autonomy of individuals with medical conditions.

Contraceptive Provision and Quality Care Measures for Insured Individuals in Massachusetts Who Are Deaf or Hard of Hearing.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate contraceptive provision and contraceptive care quality measures for individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing and compare these outcomes to those individuals who are not. METHODS: We conducted a claims analysis with data from the 2014 Massachusetts All-Payer Claims Database. Among premenopausal enrollees aged 15-44, we determined provision of any contraception (yes or no) and provision by contraception type: prescription contraception (pills, patch, ring, injectables, or diaphragm), long-acting reversible contraceptive (LARC) devices, and permanent contraception (tubal sterilization). We compared these outcomes by deaf or hard-of-hearing status (yes or no). The odds of contraceptive provision were calculated with regression models adjusted for age, Medicaid insurance, a preventive health visit, and deaf or hard-of-hearing status. We calculated contraceptive care quality measures, per the U.S. Office of Population Health, as the percentage of enrollees who used: 1) LARC methods or 2) most effective or moderately effective methods (tubal sterilization, pills, patch, ring, injectables, or diaphragm). RESULTS: We identified 1,171,838 enrollees at risk for pregnancy; 13,400 (1.1%) were deaf or hard of hearing. Among individuals who were deaf or hard of hearing, 31.4% were provided contraception (23.5% prescription contraception, 5.4% LARC, 0.7% tubal sterilization). Individuals who were deaf or hard of hearing were less likely to receive prescription contraception (adjusted odds ratio 0.92, 95% CI 0.88-0.96) than individuals who were not deaf or hard of hearing. The percentage of individuals who were deaf or hard of hearing who received most effective or moderately effective methods was less than that for individuals who were not (24.2% vs 26.3%, P<.001). There were no differences in provision of LARC or permanent contraception by deaf and hard-of-hearing status. CONCLUSION: Individuals who were deaf or hard of hearing were less likely to receive prescription contraception than individuals who were not; factors underlying this pattern need to be examined. Provision of LARC or permanent contraception did not differ by deaf or hard-of-hearing status. These findings should be monitored and compared with data from states with different requirements for contraceptive coverage.

Youth opinions about Title X funding and policy in the United States: A mixed methods text message survey.

OBJECTIVE: We aim to assess youth awareness of and opinions about Title X policy changes in 2019. STUDY DESIGN: We analyzed data from four open-ended questions and demographic items collected through MyVoice, a national text message survey of youth aged 14-24. We calculated descriptive statistics to summarize awareness of and opinions about Title X. We integrated the quantitative findings with qualitative themes to achieve deeper understanding of the beliefs that inform youth opinions. RESULTS: Seven hundred and fifty youth responded to the text message survey (58.0% response rate). The majority (74.9%) was unaware of recent Title X changes. Most (79.3%) were unsupportive of these changes, and a sizable portion (40%) worried these changes could impact them. Opposition to Title X changes was based upon five themes: (1) youth need to be aware of their health options, including abortion; (2) the policy will undermine reproductive rights; (3) the policy is unfair; (4) the policy is unconstitutional; (5) the policy will threaten public health and health services, including affordable and safe abortion. Those who supported Title X changes (13.8%) described moral objections to abortion and beliefs that the government should not be responsible for abortion care. CONCLUSIONS: Most youth in this sample were unsupportive of Title X changes. Limited youth awareness of Title X changes suggests that better youth outreach is needed regarding sexual and reproductive health (SRH) policies. IMPLICATIONS: Although youth represent 40% of clients who receive SRH services through Title X, more efforts are needed to inform and engage them in salient policy changes that may directly affect their SRH health and health care access.

A theoretical model of contraceptive decision-making and behaviour in diabetes: A qualitative application of the Health Belief Model.

AIM: People with diabetes have contraceptive needs that have been inadequately addressed. The aim of this qualitative study was to develop a theoretical model that reflects contraceptive decision-making and behaviour in the setting of diabetes mellitus. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured, qualitative interviews of 17 women with type 1 or type 2 diabetes from Michigan, USA. Participants were recruited from a diabetes registry and local clinics. We adapted domains from the Health Belief Model (HBM) and applied reproductive justice principles to inform the qualitative data collection and analysis. Using an iterative coding template, we advanced from descriptive to theoretical codes, compared codes across characteristics of interest (e.g. diabetes type), and synthesized the theoretical codes and their relationships in an explanatory model. RESULTS: The final model included the following constructs and themes: perceived barriers and benefits to contraceptive use (effects on blood sugar, risk of diabetes-related complications, improved quality of life); perceived seriousness of pregnancy (harm to self, harm to foetus or baby); perceived susceptibility to pregnancy risks (diabetes is a 'high risk' state); external cues to action (one-size-fits-all/anxiety-provoking counselling vs. personalized/trust-based counselling); internal cues to action (self-perceived 'sickness'); self-efficacy (reproductive self-efficacy, contraceptive self-efficacy); and modifying factors (perceptions of biased counselling based upon one's age, race or severity of disease). CONCLUSIONS: This novel adaptation of the HBM highlights the need for condition-specific and person-centred contraceptive counselling for those with diabetes.

Awareness and Attitudes Around the New Subspecialty Within Ob/Gyn Called Complex Family Planning: A CERA Survey of Family Medicine Chairs.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Family physicians play an important role in delivery of family planning services, but many factors impact scope of practice. One important factor is the development of subspecialties, such as the new subspecialty within obstetrics and gynecology called complex family planning (CFP). METHODS: In 2019, we conducted a survey of family medicine department chairs as part of the Council of Academic Family Medicine Educational Research Alliance survey. We used descriptive statistics and logistic regression to test for associations between program and chair characteristics, knowledge of CFP, and attitudes regarding family planning services (complex contraceptive counseling, pregnancy options counseling, first trimester miscarriage management, and pregnancy termination). RESULTS: The survey response rate was 54% (105/193). Only 8% of respondents were aware of the CFP subspecialty. The majority of chairs considered all queried family planning services as part of family medicine's scope of practice, including pregnancy termination by medication abortion (77%) and by uterine aspiration (60%). Chairs of departments with a faculty champion in family planning had higher odds of advocating for all queried family planning services as part of family medicine scope of practice (OR 3.0, 1.1-8.2) than those without a faculty champion. CONCLUSIONS: Few chairs are aware of the new subspecialty of CFP, but most would advocate to maintain some form of abortion care in family medicine's scope of practice. Given family medicine's role in the health care safety net, supporting faculty champions in family planning is important to preserve access to family planning services for marginalized communities.

Pregnancy Intendedness by Maternal Disability Status and Type in the United States.

CONTEXT: Societal views about sexuality and parenting among people with disabilities may limit these individuals' access to sex education and the full range of reproductive health services, and put them at increased risk for -unintended pregnancies. To date, however, no national population-based studies have examined pregnancy -intendedness among U.S. women with disabilities. METHODS: Cross-sectional analyses of data from the 2011-2013 and 2013-2015 waves of the National Survey of Family Growth were conducted; the sample included 5,861 pregnancies reported by 3,089 women. The proportion of pregnancies described as unintended was calculated for women with any type of disability, women with each of five types of disabilities and women with no disabilities. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were conducted to examine the relationship of disability status and type with pregnancy intendedness while adjusting for covariates. RESULTS: A higher proportion of pregnancies were unintended among women with disabilities than among women without disabilities (53% vs. 36%). Women with independent living disability had the highest proportion of unintended pregnancies (62%). In regression analyses, the odds that a pregnancy was unintended were greater among women with any type of disability than among women without disabilities (odds ratio, 1.4), and were also elevated among women with hearing disability, cognitive disability or independent living disability (1.5-1.9). CONCLUSIONS: Further research is needed to understand differences in unintended pregnancy by type and extent of disability. People with disabilities should be fully included in sex education, and their routine care should incorporate discussion of reproductive planning.

Emergency contraception: Links between providers' counseling choices, prescribing behaviors, and sociopolitical context.

Healthcare decisions depend on the characteristics of patients and providers. However, how these decisions are influenced by provider interpretations of biological processes and the sociopolitical context in which they work remains unclear. To answer these questions, we explore providers' prescribing of emergency contraception (EC), methods that can prevent pregnancy after sex has already occurred. Despite the consensus mainstream medical definition that pregnancy begins after a fertilized egg implants in the uterus, an alternative perspective holds that pregnancy instead begins when a sperm fertilizes an egg. How providers define pregnancy may affect their willingness to prescribe EC. However, the ability of providers to recommend treatments consistent with their understandings of medical processes may depend on the sociopolitical context in which the patient-provider interaction occurs. We test whether EC prescribing practices vary by providers' definition of pregnancy and the interaction of this definition with the sociopolitical context in which they practice. Data from U.S. medical providers were collected as part of a survey on EC knowledge and practices (N = 1308). We merged voting results from the county in which the provider practices to data on provider EC prescribing and pregnancy counseling practices. Because recent Republican party platforms have explicitly endorsed a definition of pregnancy that begins at fertilization and party advocacy frequently uses this definition, we use the county vote share for the Republican presidential candidate as a contextual measure of views that pregnancy begins at fertilization. We find a significant interaction such that providers who counsel that pregnancy begins at fertilization are significantly less likely to prescribe EC if they practice in counties with higher Republican vote shares. Our results highlight that patient access to EC may depend on both place of residence and provider views and that providers' EC prescribing may depend jointly on their understanding of pregnancy and sociopolitical context.

Contraceptive Care for Women With Medical Conditions: A Qualitative Study to Identify Potential Best Practices for Primary Care Physicians.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Women with medical conditions are at higher risk of pregnancy-related morbidity and mortality than women without medical conditions. Thus, women who do not desire pregnancy should be offered contraceptive counseling and methods. The objective of this qualitative study was to identify potential best practices to guide primary care physicians (PCPs) in providing contraception and contraceptive counseling for women with medical conditions. METHODS: We conducted semistructured qualitative interviews of 10 PCPs who routinely provide contraception including long-acting reversible contraception (LARC). To inform the data collection and analysis, we adapted constructs from the Theoretical Domains Framework. We coded transcripts and identified themes until saturation of our theoretical constructs was achieved. RESULTS: Physician time constraints, lack of patient knowledge, and competing demands related to medical condition management were identified as barriers to contraceptive care. The study participants reported multiple strategies to mitigate these barriers. They emphasized providing reproductive health education in the context of an individual's chronic conditions and medications, educating about LARC methods, and using the US Medical Eligibility Criteria (US MEC) as a point-of-care clinical tool to guide contraceptive selection. CONCLUSIONS: The study participants (PCPs experienced in contraceptive care), described multifaceted approaches to providing contraception for women with medical conditions, including tailored contraceptive education and use of the US MEC for clinical guidance. Future research is needed to assess if such strategies can improve patient outcomes and be adopted by PCPs who have less experience with contraceptive care.

Looking back while moving forward: a justice-based, intersectional approach to research on contraception and disability.

For the first time in the 21st century, we have an emerging body of research regarding contraceptive use among adult women with disabilities in the United States. We highlight key findings from population-based analyses that found higher odds of female sterilization and lower odds of long-acting reversible contraception use among women with disabilities compared to their peers without disabilities. We consider potential reasons underlying these differences, including discriminatory attitudes and policies that restrict the sexual and reproductive autonomy of people with disabilities. We advocate for a justice-based, intersectional approach to research on contraception and disability with the aim of promoting the reproductive autonomy of people with disabilities.

Welcoming transgender and nonbinary patients: expanding the language of "women's health".

In this article, we consider the impact of gendered language on our ability to provide inclusive care and to address health disparities experienced by transgender and nonbinary people. We posit that while obstetrician-gynecologists and others trained in women's health are already well positioned to extend care to this population, we can improve this care through simple adjustments in the framing and language we use.

Provision of Moderately and Highly Effective Reversible Contraception to Insured Women With Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate provision of moderately and highly effective reversible contraceptives to women with intellectual and developmental disabilities. METHODS: We used data from the Massachusetts All-Payer Claims Database to identify women aged 15-44 years with and without intellectual and developmental disabilities who were continuously enrolled in a private commercial insurance plan, Medicaid, or Medicare in 2012. We calculated the percentage of women aged 15-44 years who were not medically or surgically sterile and were provided 1) highly effective, long-acting reversible contraception (LARC, the intrauterine device or subdermal implant); or 2) prescriptions for moderately effective methods (pill, patch, ring, shot, or diaphragm). Logistic regression models estimated the odds of LARC and moderately effective method provision by disability status, adjusted for age, income, and Medicaid receipt. RESULTS: Among 915,561 women who were not medically or surgically sterile, 13,059 women (1.4%) had at least one intellectual and developmental disability. Women with intellectual and developmental disabilities were less likely to be provided LARC (2.1% vs 4.2%, P<.001, adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.43, 95% CI 0.38-0.48, P<.001) and moderately effective methods (21.1% vs 29.9%, P<.001, adjusted OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.65-0.71, P<.001) than women without intellectual and developmental disabilities. The one exception was the progestin shot, which was provided more often to women with intellectual and developmental disabilities than women without these disabilities (14.7% vs 4.3%, P<.001). Among a subset of women who only received moderately effective methods or LARC (n=310,344), women with intellectual and developmental disability had lower odds of receiving LARC than moderately effective methods (adjusted OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.52-0.67). CONCLUSION: The study findings raise concerns that the provision of LARC and moderately effective methods differs based on the presence of intellectual and developmental disabilities. Greater understanding is needed regarding factors that underlie lower provision of LARC in comparison with moderately effective methods, especially the progestin shot, among women with intellectual and developmental disabilities.

Female Sterilization and Cognitive Disability in the United States, 2011-2015.

OBJECTIVE: To compare female sterilization among three mutually exclusive groups of females: 1) those without any self-reported disability, 2) those with noncognitive disabilities (sensory or physical disabilities), and 3) those with cognitive disabilities. METHODS: We conducted a secondary analysis of nationally representative data from the National Survey of Family Growth 2011-2015, which surveyed individuals aged 15-44 years in the U.S. civilian population. Disability status (self-reported) was ascertained using a standard set of questions about hearing, vision, cognitive, ambulatory, self-care, and independent living difficulties. Regression models were used to calculate odds of female sterilization, hysterectomies, and age of sterilization while accounting for sociodemographic differences. RESULTS: Female sterilization rates were higher among females with cognitive (22.1% [n=272]) and noncognitive disabilities (24.7% [n=150]) than among those without disabilities (14.8% [n=1,132]). After adjusting for sociodemographic covariates, females with cognitive disabilities had significantly higher odds of female sterilization (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.54, 95% CI 1.19-1.98, P<.01) and hysterectomy (adjusted OR 2.64, 95% CI 1.53-4.56, P<.001) than those without cognitive disabilities. Females with cognitive disabilities also underwent sterilization at significantly younger ages (27.3 years, 95% CI 27.0-27.6) than those with noncognitive disabilities (28.3 years, 95% CI 27.9-28.8) and those without any disability (29.8 years, 95% CI 29.5-30.0). CONCLUSION: U.S. females with cognitive disabilities were more likely to have undergone female sterilizations and hysterectomies and at younger ages than those with other disabilities or without disabilities. Drivers of these disability-related differences in female sterilization patterns must be explored.

The politics of place: Presidential voting patterns and providers' prescription of emergency contraception.

OBJECTIVE: The most effective forms of emergency contraception (EC) require a prescription or a medical procedure; therefore, provider willingness to offer EC remains critical to patient access. This study seeks to assess whether political alignment of a provider's county is associated with provider attitudes and behaviors regarding EC. STUDY DESIGN: We analyzed survey data collected from 1313 healthcare providers from February 2013 to April 2014 at 14 academic medical centers in the United States. Using logistic regression, we estimated associations between the county political alignment of a provider's practice and his or her EC-related beliefs and practices: 1) if the provider is aware of the most effective EC methods; 2) if knowing that a hypothetical EC method prevented implantation would make a provider less likely to prescribe that method because of personal ethical or religious reasons; and 3) if the provider prescribes any form of EC in his or her practice. RESULTS: In multivariate models, a one percentage-point increase in county Republican vote share was associated with a 2.9% decrease in the odds of a provider prescribing EC, after accounting for provider knowledge and attitudes about EC. CONCLUSIONS: EC provides a critical last chance to prevent pregnancy after unprotected sex, yet women living in Republican-leaning counties may face difficulty obtaining EC from healthcare providers. Programs seeking to improve access to EC should focus on areas likely to have fewer providers willing to prescribe EC, which may be those that are more Republican-leaning. IMPLICATIONS: The most effective forms of emergency contraception require a prescription or a medical procedure; therefore, provider willingness to offer EC remains critical to patient access. Women living in Republican-leaning counties may face difficulty obtaining emergency contraception from healthcare providers.

A Web-Based Decision Tool to Improve Contraceptive Counseling for Women With Chronic Medical Conditions: Protocol For a Mixed Methods Implementation Study.

BACKGROUND: Women with chronic medical conditions, such as diabetes and hypertension, have a higher risk of pregnancy-related complications compared with women without medical conditions and should be offered contraception if desired. Although evidence based guidelines for contraceptive selection in the presence of medical conditions are available via the United States Medical Eligibility Criteria (US MEC), these guidelines are underutilized. Research also supports the use of decision tools to promote shared decision making between patients and providers during contraceptive counseling. OBJECTIVE: The overall goal of the MiHealth, MiChoice project is to design and implement a theory-driven, Web-based tool that incorporates the US MEC (provider-level intervention) within the vehicle of a contraceptive decision tool for women with chronic medical conditions (patient-level intervention) in community-based primary care settings (practice-level intervention). This will be a 3-phase study that includes a predesign phase, a design phase, and a testing phase in a randomized controlled trial. This study protocol describes phase 1 and aim 1, which is to determine patient-, provider-, and practice-level factors that are relevant to the design and implementation of the contraceptive decision tool. METHODS: This is a mixed methods implementation study. To customize the delivery of the US MEC in the decision tool, we selected high-priority constructs from the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research and the Theoretical Domains Framework to drive data collection and analysis at the practice and provider level, respectively. A conceptual model that incorporates constructs from the transtheoretical model and the health beliefs model undergirds patient-level data collection and analysis and will inform customization of the decision tool for this population. We will recruit 6 community-based primary care practices and conduct quantitative surveys and semistructured qualitative interviews with women who have chronic medical conditions, their primary care providers (PCPs), and clinic staff, as well as field observations of practice activities. Quantitative survey data will be summarized with simple descriptive statistics and relationships between participant characteristics and contraceptive recommendations (for PCPs), and current contraceptive use (for patients) will be examined using Fisher exact test. We will conduct thematic analysis of qualitative data from interviews and field observations. The integration of data will occur by comparing, contrasting, and synthesizing qualitative and quantitative findings to inform the future development and implementation of the intervention. RESULTS: We are currently enrolling practices and anticipate study completion in 15 months. CONCLUSIONS: This protocol describes the first phase of a multiphase mixed methods study to develop and implement a Web-based decision tool that is customized to meet the needs of women with chronic medical conditions in primary care settings. Study findings will promote contraceptive counseling via shared decision making and reflect evidence-based guidelines for contraceptive selection. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03153644; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03153644 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6yUkA5lK8).

Use of Reversible Contraceptive Methods Among U.S. Women with Physical or Sensory Disabilities.

CONTEXT: Women with disabilities experience a higher rate of adverse pregnancy outcomes than women without disabilities. Preventing or delaying pregnancy when that is the best choice for a woman is a critical strategy to reducing pregnancy-related disparities, yet little is known about current contraceptive use among women with disabilities. METHODS: A cohort of 545 reproductive-age women with physical disabilities (i.e., difficulty walking, climbing, dressing or bathing) or sensory disabilities (i.e., difficulty with vision or hearing) was identified from among participants in the 2011-2013 National Survey of Family Growth. Those at risk for unplanned pregnancy were categorized by whether they were using highly effective reversible contraceptive methods (IUD, implant), moderately effective ones (pill, patch, ring, injectable), less effective ones (condoms, withdrawal, spermicides, diaphragm, natural family planning) or no method. Multinomial regression was conducted to examine the association between disability and type of contraceptive used. RESULTS: Some 39% of women with disabilities were at risk of unplanned pregnancy, and 27% of those at risk were not using contraceptives. The presence of disability was associated with decreased odds of using highly effective methods or moderately effective methods, rather than less effective ones (odds ratio, 0.6 for each), but had no association with using no method. CONCLUSION: There is a significant need to reduce contraceptive disparities related to physical or sensory disabilities. Future research should explore the extent to which contraceptive use differs by type and severity of disability, as well as identify contextual factors that contribute to any identified differences.

Female sterilization is more common among women with physical and/or sensory disabilities than women without disabilities in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Female sterilization accounts for 50% of all contraceptive use in the U.S. The extent to which U.S. women with physical and/or sensory disabilities have undergone female sterilization is unknown. OBJECTIVE: Our primary objective was to determine the prevalence of sterilization for women with physical/sensory disabilities, and compare this to the prevalence for women without disabilities. We also compared use of long-acting reversible contraceptive (LARC) methods between women with and without disabilities. METHODS: We conducted a secondary analysis of data from the National Survey of Family Growth 2011-2013, a population-based survey of U.S. women aged 15-44. Bivariate comparisons between women with and without disabilities by female sterilization and LARC use were conducted using chi-square tests. Using logistic regression, we estimated the odds of female sterilization based upon disability status. RESULTS: Women with physical/sensory disabilities accounted for 9.3% of the total sample (N = 4966). Among women with disabilities only, 28.2% had undergone female sterilization, representing 1.2 million women nationally. LARC use was lower among women with disabilities than those without disabilities (5.4%, 9.3%, respectively, p < 0.01). After adjusting for age, race/ethnicity, education, insurance, marital status, parity, and self-reported health, women with disabilities had higher odds of sterilization (OR 1.36, 95% CI 1.03, 1.79). CONCLUSIONS: The odds of female sterilization is higher among women with physical/sensory disabilities than those without disabilities. Future research is necessary to understand factors contributing to this finding, including possible underutilization of LARC methods.