Search

Ongoing education on sexual health and other health promotion topics is critical as young people transition into adulthood. A "booster" round of education may be an effective strategy to reinforce information previously taught and expand to additional topics relevant later in adolescence. In partnership with a Youth Advisory Council, we co-designed READY, Set, Go!, a booster curriculum for older adolescents with modules covering adult preparation skills, sexual identity, relationships, reproductive health, and mental health. From November 2021 to January 2023, we provided the curriculum to 21 cohorts of 12th grade students (N = 433) in rural communities of Fresno County, CA, and conducted an implementation evaluation to assess its feasibility in school settings, acceptability by participants, and changes in short-term outcomes. Health educators completed implementation logs to track program adaptations. Youth completed pretest/posttest surveys to assess changes in outcomes and participant satisfaction. We used descriptive statistics to examine program adaptations and satisfaction. We used multivariable regression models to examine changes in outcomes, adjusted for sociodemographic characteristics. Health educators completed most activities as planned, with adaptations occurring in response to youth needs and scheduling limitations. Sexual health knowledge, confidence in adult preparation skills, awareness of local sexual and mental health services, and willingness to seek health services all increased significantly from pretest to posttest. Youth feedback was strongly positive. We conclude that booster sexual health education is a promising strategy to address critical knowledge gaps and support health promotion, especially in rural and other under-resourced communities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective No studies have examined whether alcohol taxes may be relevant for reducing harms related to pregnant people's drinking. Method We examined how beverage-specific ad valorem , volume-based, and sales taxes are associated with outcomes across three data sets. Drinking outcomes came from women of reproductive age in the 1990–2020 US National Alcohol Surveys (N  = 11 659 women |$\le$| 44 years); treatment admissions data came from the 1992–2019 Treatment Episode Data Set: Admissions (N  = 1331 state-years; 582 436 pregnant women admitted to treatment); and infant and maternal outcomes came from the 2005–19 Merative Marketscan® database (1 432 979 birthing person–infant dyads). Adjusted analyses for all data sets included year fixed effects, state-year unemployment and poverty, and accounted for clustering by state. Results Models yield no robust significant associations between taxes and drinking. Increased spirits ad valorem taxes were robustly associated with lower rates of treatment admissions [adjusted IRR = 0.95, 95% CI: 0.91, 0.99]. Increased wine and spirits volume-based taxes were both robustly associated with lower odds of infant morbidities [wine aOR = 0.98, 95% CI: 0.96, 0.99; spirits aOR = 0.99, 95% CI: 0.98, 1.00] and lower odds of severe maternal morbidities [wine aOR = 0.91, 95% CI: 0.86, 0.97; spirits aOR = 0.95, 95% CI: 0.92, 0.97]. Having an off-premise spirits sales tax was also robustly related to lower odds of severe maternal morbidities [aOR = 0.78, 95% CI: 0.64, 0.96]. Conclusions Results show protective associations between increased wine and spirits volume-based and sales taxes with infant and maternal morbidities. Policies that index tax rates to inflation might yield more public health benefits, including for pregnant people and infants. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims We examined relationships between pregnancy-specific alcohol policies and admissions to substance use disorder treatment for pregnant people in the USA. Methods We merged state-level policy and treatment admissions data for 1992–2019. We aggregated data by state-year to examine effects of nine pregnancy-specific alcohol policies on the number of admissions of pregnant women where alcohol was reported as the primary, secondary, or tertiary substance related to the treatment episode (N  = 1331). We fit Poisson models that included all policy variables, state-level controls, fixed effects for state and year, state-specific time trends, and an offset variable of the number of pregnancies in the state-year to account for differences in population size and fertility. Results When alcohol was reported as the primary substance, civil commitment [incidence rate ratio (IRR) 1.45, 95% CI: 1.10–1.89] and reporting requirements for assessment and treatment purposes [IRR 1.36, 95% CI: 1.04–1.77] were associated with greater treatment admissions. Findings for alcohol as primary, secondary, or tertiary substance were similar for civil commitment [IRR 1.31, 95% CI: 1.08–1.59] and reporting requirements for assessment and treatment purposes [IRR 1.21, 95% CI: 1.00–1.47], although mandatory warning signs [IRR 0.84, 95% CI: 0.72–0.98] and priority treatment for pregnant women [IRR 0.88, 95% CI: 0.78–0.99] were associated with fewer treatment admissions. Priority treatment findings were not robust in sensitivity analyses. No other policies were associated with treatment admissions. Conclusions Pregnancy-specific alcohol policies related to greater treatment admissions tend to mandate treatment rather than make voluntary treatment more accessible, raising questions of ethics and effectiveness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Given the politicization of abortion, professionals working in U.S. health departments (HDs) may not be receptive to communications about abortion, despite often regulating abortion facilities. This paper reports results of a randomized, prospective, observational study to test the effects of e-mail language when disseminating evidence on abortion to HD professionals. Our sample was 302 HD employees who oversee healthcare facilities inspection/regulation in all 50 U.S. state HDs, clustered by HD and randomized into two study groups. In November–December 2019, we sent biweekly e-mails containing links to a website summarizing evidence on abortion facility regulation. E-mails/headers sent to one group emphasized public health values and did not include the word abortion; e-mails/headers to the other group used the word abortion. Primary outcome measures were e-mail open rates and click-through rates. Among 221 participants to whom e-mails were deliverable, the overall open rate was 36%. Open rate was 25% for PH values and 46% for abortion groups (p <.05). Effects were moderated by state abortion policy environment: in both supportive and restrictive environments, participants in the abortion messaging group were statistically more likely to open e-mails than those in the PH values group. There was no difference between groups in states with middle-ground abortion policy environments. Among participants opening at least one e-mail, 19% clicked through to the website, with no significant difference by group. This study demonstrates that repeated targeted e-mail campaigns can reach HD professionals with research summaries. Concerns that communications to HDs should avoid the word abortion are unsupported. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Prior research shows that maternal and child health (MCH) and family planning (FP) divisions in health departments (HDs) engage in some abortion-related activities, largely when legally mandated; some agencies also initiate abortion-related activities. Yet little is known about health department MCH/FP professionals' views on how abortion-related work aligns with their professional mission. Methods: Between November 2017 and June 2018, we conducted in-depth interviews with 29 MCH/FP professionals working in 22 state and local HDs across the U.S. We conducted inductive thematic analysis to identify themes regarding participants' professional mission and values in relation to abortion-related work. Results: Participants described a strong sense of professional mission. Two contrasting perspectives on abortion and the MCH/FP mission emerged: some participants saw abortion as clearly outside the scope of their mission, even a threat to it, while others saw abortion as solidly within their mission. In states with supportive or restrictive abortion policy environments, professionals' views on abortion and professional mission generally aligned with their overall state policy environment; in states with middle-ground abortion policy environments, a range of perspectives on abortion and professional mission were expressed. Participants who saw abortion as within their mission anchored their work in core public health values such as evidence-based practice, social justice, and ensuring access to health care. Discussion: There appears to be a lack of consensus about whether and how abortion fits into the mission of MCH/FP. More work is needed to articulate whether and how abortion aligns with the MCH/FP mission. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives. To examine changes in abortions in Louisiana before and after the COVID-19 pandemic onset and assess whether variations in abortion service availability during this time might explain observed changes. Methods. We collected monthly service data from abortion clinics in Louisiana and neighboring states among Louisiana residents (January 2018‒May 2020) and assessed changes in abortions following pandemic onset. We conducted mystery client calls to 30 abortion clinics in Louisiana and neighboring states (April‒July 2020) and examined the percentage of open and scheduling clinics and median waits. Results. The number of abortions per month among Louisiana residents in Louisiana clinics decreased 31% (incidence rate ratio = 0.69; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.59, 0.79) from before to after pandemic onset, while the odds of having a second-trimester abortion increased (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.91; 95% CI = 1.10, 3.33). The decrease was not offset by an increase in out-of-state abortions. In Louisiana, only 1 or 2 (of 3) clinics were open (with a median wait > 2 weeks) through early May. Conclusions. The COVID-19 pandemic onset was associated with a significant decrease in the number of abortions and increase in the proportion of abortions provided in the second trimester among Louisiana residents. These changes followed service disruptions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context Although a rights-based approach to sexuality education has been increasingly discussed in the past decade, documented consensus regarding the goals, concepts and underlying assumptions of this approach is lacking. Differences in the assumed meaning of a rights-based approach can limit discussions of its implementation and evaluation, and impede opportunities to explore and critique a new model for sexuality education. Methods In-depth interviews were conducted in 2012 with 21 U.S. and international sexuality education experts. Data were thematically coded and analyzed using an iterative approach. Responses were compared according to respondents' professional discipline and geographic focus. Results A rights-based approach can be defined as the intersection of four elements: an underlying principle that youth have sexual rights; an expansion of programmatic goals beyond reducing unintended pregnancy and STDs; a broadening of curricula content to include such issues as gender norms, sexual orientation, sexual expression and pleasure, violence, and individual rights and responsibilities in relationships; and a participatory teaching strategy that engages youth in critical thinking about their sexuality and sexual choices. These elements were consistently identified by respondents across professional disciplines and geographic foci. In addition, all respondents raised questions about the feasibility of implementing a rights-based approach, particularly in the United States. Conclusions While questions remain to be answered regarding the implementation and impact of rights-based sexuality education, the proposed conceptual definition suggests multiple avenues for advocates, researchers, program developers and funders to enhance adolescent sexual health. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

During the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic, 12 states banned or restricted abortion access under elective-procedure restrictions. The rationale was preserving hospital capacity and personal protective equipment (PPE); however, abortions commonly take place in clinics and use less PPE than childbirth. This paper investigates the discursive construction of abortions, the people who get them, and the fetuses in this legislation. The authors analyzed 13 antiabortion documents using an iterative process of thematic coding and memo writing. Twenty-three percent of the legislation listed abortion as banned, whereas the remaining laws implied abortion within the terms "elective" or "nonessential." Legislation used common antiabortion tactics, such as the trivialization of abortion, risk discourses, and constructions of motherhood and fetal personhood. Discourses delegitimized abortion providers and used quasi-medical justifications for banning abortion. Finally, legislation constructed abortion clinics as sites of contagion and waste and consequently as risks to public health. The results highlight the vulnerability of abortion and the connection between abortion policy and other conservative policies, and they gesture toward a strategic attempt to ban abortion federally. These findings have several implications for a post-Roe United States and for stakeholders wishing to increase abortion access. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]