Search

ImportanceThe bidirectional association between health and financial stability is increasingly recognized.ObjectiveTo describe the association between chronic disease burden and patients’ adverse financial outcomes.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis cross-sectional study analyzed insurance claims data from January 2019 to January 2021 linked to commercial credit data in January 2021 for adults 21 years and older enrolled in a commercial preferred provider organization in Michigan.ExposuresThirteen common chronic conditions (cancer, congestive heart failure, chronic kidney disease, dementia, depression and anxiety, diabetes, hypertension, ischemic heart disease, liver disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and asthma, serious mental illness, stroke, and substance use disorders).Main Outcomes and MeasuresAdjusted probability of having medical debt in collections, nonmedical debt in collections, any delinquent debt, a low credit score, or recent bankruptcy, adjusted for age group and sex. Secondary outcomes included the amount of medical, nonmedical, and total debt among individuals with nonzero debt.ResultsThe study population included 2 854 481 adults (38.4% male, 43.3% female, 12.9% unknown sex, and 5.4% missing sex), 61.4% with no chronic conditions, 17.7% with 1 chronic condition, 14.8% with 2 to 3 chronic conditions, 5.4% with 4 to 6 chronic conditions, and 0.7% with 7 to 13 chronic conditions. Among the cohort, 9.6% had medical debt in collections, 8.3% had nonmedical debt in collections, 16.3% had delinquent debt, 19.3% had a low credit score, and 0.6% had recent bankruptcy. Among individuals with 0 vs 7 to 13 chronic conditions, the predicted probabilities of having any medical debt in collections (7.6% vs 32%), any nonmedical debt in collections (7.2% vs 24%), any delinquent debt (14% vs 43%), a low credit score (17% vs 47%) or recent bankruptcy (0.4% vs 1.7%) were all considerably higher for individuals with more chronic conditions and increased with each added chronic condition. Among individuals with medical debt in collections, the estimated amount increased with the number of chronic conditions ($784 for individuals with 0 conditions vs $1252 for individuals with 7-13 conditions) (all P Conclusions and RelevanceThis cross-sectional study of commercially insured adults linked to patient credit report outcomes shows an association between increasing burden of chronic disease and adverse financial outcomes.

This study assesses severe parental morbidity, cesarean deliveries, and preterm births among commercially and publicly insured trans people compared with cisgender people.

This cross-sectional study examines pre-existing financial hardship among caregivers of hospitalized children.

ImportancePrivately insured US children account for 40% of non–birth-related pediatric hospitalizations. However, there are no national data on the magnitude or correlates of out-of-pocket spending for these hospitalizations.ObjectiveTo estimate out-of-pocket spending for non–birth-related hospitalizations among privately insured children and identify factors associated with this spending.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis study is a cross-sectional analysis of the IBM MarketScan Commercial Database, which reports claims from 25 to 27 million privately insured enrollees annually. In the primary analysis, all non–birth-related hospitalizations of children 18 years and younger from 2017 through 2019 were included. In a secondary analysis focused on insurance benefit design, hospitalizations that could be linked to the IBM MarketScan Benefit Plan Design Database and were covered by plans with a family deductible and inpatient coinsurance requirements were analyzed.Main Outcomes and MeasuresIn the primary analysis, factors associated with out-of-pocket spending per hospitalization (sum of deductibles, coinsurance, and copayments) were identified using a generalized linear model. In the secondary analysis, variation in out-of-pocket spending was assessed by level of deductible and inpatient coinsurance requirements.ResultsAmong 183 780 hospitalizations in the primary analysis, 93 186 (50.7%) were for female children, and the median (IQR) age of hospitalized children was 12 (4-16) years. A total of 145 108 hospitalizations (79.0%) were for children with a chronic condition and 44 282 (24.1%) were covered by a high-deductible health plan. Mean (SD) total spending per hospitalization was $28 425 ($74 715). Mean (SD) and median (IQR) out-of-pocket spending per hospitalization were $1313 ($1734) and $656 ($0-$2011), respectively. Out-of-pocket spending exceeded $3000 for 25 700 hospitalizations (14.0%). Factors associated with higher out-of-pocket spending included hospitalization in quarter 1 compared with quarter 4 (average marginal effect [AME], $637; 99% CI, $609-$665) and lack of chronic conditions compared with having a complex chronic condition (AME, $732; 99% CI, $696-$767). The secondary analysis included 72 165 hospitalizations. Among hospitalizations covered by the least generous plans (deductible of $3000 or more and coinsurance of 20% or more) and most generous plans (deductible less than $1000 and coinsurance of 1% to 19%), mean (SD) out-of-pocket spending was $1974 ($1999) and $826 ($798), respectively (AME, $1123; 99% CI, $1069-$1179).Conclusions and RelevanceIn this cross-sectional study, out-of-pocket spending for non–birth-related pediatric hospitalizations were substantial, especially when they occurred early in the year, involved children without chronic conditions, or were covered by plans with high cost-sharing requirements.

BackgroundThe costs of quality improvement efforts in real-world settings are often unquantified. Better understanding could guide appropriate resource utilisation and drive efficiency. Immediate postpartum contraceptive care (ie, placement of an intrauterine device or contraceptive implant during hospitalisation for childbirth) represents an excellent case study for examining costs, because recommended services are largely unavailable and adoption requires significant effort. We therefore evaluated the cost of implementing immediate postpartum contraceptive services at four academic centres and one private hospital in USA.MethodsIn this mixed-methods cost analysis, implementation activities were retrospectively identified using standardised data collection. Activities were categorised as preimplementation activities (infrastructure building, tool creation and stakeholder engagement) or execution activities (workforce training and process refinement). Costs were assigned based on national median salaries for the roles of individuals involved. Cross-case comparison and rapid qualitative analysis guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research were used to identify factors driving cost variation observed across sites.ResultsOn average, implementation activities required 204 hours (range 119–368), with this time costing $14 433.94 (range $9955.61–$23 690.49), and involving 9 (range 7–11) key team members per site. Preimplementation activities required more resources than execution activities (preimplementation: average 173 hours, $11 573.25; execution: average 31 hours, $2860.67). Sites that used lower-cost employees (eg, shifting tasks from a physician to a project manager) observed lower costs per hour for implementation activities. Implementation activities and costs were associated with local contextual factors, including stakeholder acceptance, integration of employees and infrastructure readiness for the change effort.ConclusionsOur findings provide the first estimates of health system costs for adopting recommended contraceptive care in maternity units in USA. More broadly, our findings suggest that the budget impact of improvement efforts may vary widely depending on local context.

Prenatal care is one of the most widely used preventive care services in the United States, yet prenatal care delivery recommendations have remained largely unchanged since just before World War II. The current prenatal care model can be improved to better serve modern patients and the health care providers who care for them in three key ways: 1) focusing more on promotion of health and wellness as opposed to primarily focusing on medical complications, 2) flexibly incorporating patient preferences, and 3) individualizing care. As key policymakers and stakeholders grapple with higher maternity care costs and poorer outcomes, including lagging access, equity, and maternal and infant morbidity and mortality in the United States compared with other high-income countries, the opportunity to improve prenatal care has been given insufficient attention. In this manuscript, we present a new conceptual model for prenatal care that incorporates both patients' medical and social needs into four phenotypes, and use human-centered design methods to describe how better matching patient needs with prenatal services can increase the use of high-value services and decrease the use of low-value services. Finally, we address some of the key challenges to implementing right-sized prenatal care, including capturing outcomes through research and payment.

The Affordable Care Act (ACA) requires employer-based insurance plans to cover maternity services, but plans are allowed to impose cost sharing such as copayments and deductibles for these services. This study aimed to evaluate trends in cost sharing for maternity care among working women in employer-based plans, before and after the ACA. Our data indicate that between 2008 and 2015, average out-of-pocket spending for maternity care rose among women with employer-based insurance. This increase was largely driven by increased spending among women with deductibles. When we controlled for potential confounders, we found that out-of-pocket spending was higher for lower-income working women in 2008-13, but disparities disappeared in 2014-15 because of a continued rise in spending among higher-income working women. Policies that aim to lower out-of-pocket spending for maternity care could reduce a significant financial burden on families.

Key Points Question What is the prevalence of financial hardship, including unmet health care need due to cost, health care unaffordability, and general financial stress, among peripartum women in the United States? Findings This cross-sectional study of 3509 peripartum women, weighted to represent more than 1 million women, found that financial hardship was common: from 2013 to 2018, 24% reported unmet health care needs; 60%, health care unaffordability; and 54%, general financial stress. Private insurance was associated with lower odds of unmet health care need but higher odds of health care unaffordability, and lower household income was associated with higher odds of both unmet health care need and health care unaffordability. Meaning These findings suggest that financial hardship is highly prevalent among peripartum women, which should prompt policy interventions to promote the economic well-being of families., This cross-sectional study evaluates the prevalence of financial hardship, including as unmet health care need due to cost, health care unaffordability, and general financial stress, among peripartum women over time and by insurance type and income., Importance Financial hardship affects health care access and health outcomes among peripartum women. Objective To evaluate the prevalence of financial hardship among peripartum women over time and by insurance type and income. Design, Setting, and Participants This cross-sectional study included peripartum women, defined as women aged 18 to 45 years who reported being currently pregnant or pregnant in the past 12 months, who participated in the National Health Interview Survey from 2013 to 2018. Data were analyzed from January to May 2021. Exposures Current pregnancy or recent pregnancy as well as insurance type and income. Main Outcomes and Measures Three measures of financial hardship within the last year were evaluated: (1) unmet health care need due to cost (unmet need for medical care or delayed or deferred medical care due to cost); (2) health care unaffordability (worry about paying for potential medical bills or existing medical debt); and (3) general financial stress (worry about subsistence spending [eg, monthly bills, housing]). Results The study cohort included 3509 peripartum women, weighted to represent 1 050 789 women (2018: an estimated 36 045 of 184 018 [19.6%] Hispanic, 39 017 [21.2%] Black, and 97 366 [52.9%] White), with a mean (SD) age of 29 (6) years. Overall, from 2013 to 2018, 24.2% (95% CI, 22.6%-26.0%) of peripartum women reported unmet health care need, 60.0% (95% CI, 58.0%-61.9%) reported health care unaffordability, and 54.0% (95% CI, 51.5%-56.5%) reported general financial stress. The prevalence of financial hardship outcomes did not substantially change between 2013 and 2018 (unmet health care need in 2013: 27.9% [95% CI, 24.4%-31.7%]; in 2018: 23.7% [95% CI, 19.5%-28.6%]; health care unaffordability in 2013: 65.7% [95% CI, 61.1%-70.0%]; in 2018: 58.8% [95% CI, 53.4%-64.0%]; general financial stress in 2013: 60.6% [95% CI, 55.2%-65.8%]; in 2018: 53.8% [95% CI, 47.8%-59.8%]). Women with private insurance had lower odds of unmet need (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.67; 95% CI, 0.52-0.87) but higher odds of health care unaffordability (aOR, 1.88; 95% CI, 1.49-2.36) compared with women with public insurance. Peripartum women with household incomes less than 400% of the federal poverty level had higher odds of unmet need (aOR, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.08-2.08) and unaffordable care (aOR, 1.98; 95% CI, 1.54-2.55) compared with those with household incomes 400% or more of federal poverty level. Conclusions and Relevance These findings suggest that financial hardship among peripartum women in the United States was common from 2013 to 2018, including 24% of pregnant and postpartum women reporting unmet health care need and 60% reporting health care unaffordability. Women with private insurance and those living on lower incomes were more likely to experience unaffordable health care than women with pubic insurance and those with higher incomes, respectively. Targeted policy interventions are needed to improve health care affordability and promote overall economic security among peripartum women.

ImportanceBlack pregnant people with low income face inequities in health care access and outcomes in the US, yet their voices have been largely absent from redesigning prenatal care.ObjectiveTo examine patients’ and health care workers’ experiences with prenatal care delivery in a largely low-income Black population to inform care innovations to improve care coordination, access, quality, and outcomes.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsFor this qualitative study, human-centered design–informed interviews were conducted at prenatal care clinics with 19 low-income Black patients who were currently pregnant or up to 1 year post partum and 19 health care workers (eg, physicians, nurses, and community health workers) in Detroit, Michigan, between October 14, 2019, and February 7, 2020. Questions focused on 2 human-centered design phases: observation (understanding problems from the end user’s perspective) and ideation (generating novel potential solutions). Questions targeted participants’ experiences with the 3 goals of prenatal care: medical care, anticipatory guidance, and social support. An eclectic analytic strategy, including inductive thematic analysis and matrix coding, was used to identify promising strategies for prenatal care redesign.Main Outcomes and MeasuresPreferences for prenatal care redesign.ResultsNineteen Black patients (mean [SD] age, 28.4 [5.9] years; 19 [100%] female; and 17 [89.5%] with public insurance) and 17 of 19 health care workers (mean [SD] age, 47.9 [15.7] years; 15 female [88.2%]; and 13 [76.5%] Black) completed the surveys. A range of health care workers were included (eg, physicians, doulas, and social workers). Although all affirmed the 3 prenatal care goals, participants reported failures and potential solutions for each area of prenatal care delivery. Themes also emerged in 2 cross-cutting areas: practitioners and care infrastructure. Participants reported that, ideally, care structure would enable strong ongoing relationships between patients and practitioners. Practitioners would coordinate all prenatal services, not just medical care. Finally, care would be tailored to individual patients by using care navigators, flexible models, and colocation of services to reduce barriers.Conclusions and RelevanceIn this qualitative study of low-income, Black pregnant people in Detroit, Michigan, and the health care workers who care for them, prenatal care delivery failed to meet many patients’ needs. Participants reported that an ideal care delivery model would include comprehensive, integrated services across the health care system, expanding beyond medical care to also include patients’ social needs and preferences.

We aimed to examine how peripartum contraceptive care quality improvement efforts address or perpetuate reproductive health injustices.We conducted a comparative case study of inpatient postpartum contraceptive care implementation in 2017 to 2018, using key informant interviews at 11 United States hospitals. After our primary analysis revealed tensions between enhancing access to contraceptive care and patient-centeredness, we conducted the current inductive content analysis guided by 4 questions developed post-hoc: (1) What are healthcare workers' aspirations for contraceptive quality improvement programs? (2) What are healthcare workers' biases regarding peripartum contraceptive care delivery? (3) Do care delivery processes center patients' needs? (4) Do healthcare workers recognize and engage with structural inequities?Seventy-eight key informants (i.e., clinicians, operations staff, administrators) participated. In nine study sites, we observed evidence of interviewees both mitigating and perpetuating reproductive injustice. Many aspired to provide compassionate, patient-centered care, avoid paternalism, and foster patient autonomy. Simultaneously, interviewees demonstrated biases, including implicit subscription to an ideology of stratified reproduction, stereotyping, and "othering." Even when interviewees endorsed goals of patient-centeredness, care delivery processes sometimes prioritized healthcare systems' needs, and patients were not included on quality improvement teams. Many interviewees recognized structural inequities as driving health outcome disparities, yet relied on individual-level solutions like long-acting reversible contraception, and not structural-level interventions, to address them.Alongside enthusiasm for delivering compassionate care exist biases, missed opportunities to center patients, and lack of curiosity about the appropriateness of solving structural-level problems with individual-level solutions.Our findings call for individual and institutional self-reflection, partnership with patients and communities, and other intentional efforts to mitigate potential for harm in initiatives enhancing access to contraceptive care.

Background National guidelines recommend that maternity systems provide patient-centered access to immediate postpartum long-acting reversible contraception (ie, insertion of an intrauterine device or implant during the delivery hospitalization). Hospitals face significant barriers to offering these services, and efforts to improve peripartum contraception care quality have met with mixed success. Implementation toolkits—packages of resources and strategies to facilitate the implementation of new services—are a promising approach for guiding clinical practice change. Objective This study aimed to develop a theory-informed toolkit, evaluate the feasibility of toolkit-based implementation of immediate postpartum long-acting reversible contraception care in a single site, and refine the toolkit and implementation process for future effectiveness testing. Study Design We conducted a single-site feasibility study of the toolkit-based implementation of immediate postpartum contraception services at a large academic medical center in 2017 to 2020. Based on previous qualitative work, we developed a theory-informed implementation toolkit. A stakeholder panel selected toolkit resources to use in a multicomponent implementation intervention at the study site. These resources included tools and strategies designed to optimize implementation conditions (ie, implementation leadership, planning, and evaluation; the financial environment; engagement of key stakeholders; patient needs; compatibility with workflow; and clinician and staff knowledge, skills, and attitudes). The implementation intervention was executed from January 2018 to April 2019. Study outcomes included implementation outcomes (ie, provider perceptions of the implementation process and implementation tools [assessed via online provider survey]) and healthcare quality outcomes (ie, trends in prenatal contraceptive counseling, trends in immediate postpartum long-acting reversible contraceptive utilization [both ascertained by institutional administrative data], and the patient experience of contraceptive care [assessed via serial, cross-sectional, online patient survey items adapted from the National Quality Forum-endorsed, validated Person-Centered Contraceptive Counseling measure]). Results In the implementation process, among 172 of 401 eligible clinicians (43%) participating in surveys, 70% were “extremely” or “somewhat” satisfied with the implementation process overall. In the prenatal contraceptive counseling, among 4960 individuals undergoing childbirth at the study site in 2019, 1789 (36.1%) had documented prenatal counseling about postpartum contraception. Documented counseling rates increased overall throughout 2019 (Q1, 12.5%; Q4, 51.0%) but varied significantly by clinic site (Q4, range 30%–79%). Immediate postpartum long-acting reversible contraception utilization increased throughout the study period (before implementation, 5.46% of deliveries; during implementation, 8.95%; after implementation, 8.58%). In the patient experience of contraceptive care, patient survey respondents (response rate, 15%–29%) were largely White (344/425 [81%]) and highly educated (309/425 [73%] with at least a 4-year college degree), reflecting the study site population. Scores were poor across settings, with modest improvements in the hospital setting from 2018 to 2020 (prenatal visits, 67%–63%; hospitalization, 45%–58%; outpatient after delivery, 69%–65%). Based on these findings, toolkit refinements included additional resources designed to routinize prenatal contraceptive counseling and support a more patient-centered experience of contraceptive care. Conclusion A toolkit-based process to implement immediate postpartum long-acting reversible contraceptive services at a single academic center was associated with high acceptability but mixed healthcare quality outcomes. Toolkit resources were added to optimize counseling rates and the patient experience of contraceptive care. Future research should formally test the effectiveness of the refined toolkit in a multisite, prospective trial.

This cross-sectional study describes the utilization of women’s preventive health services during the COVID-19 pandemic., Key Points Question How has utilization of preventive health services among commercially insured women changed during the COVID-19 pandemic? Findings In this cross-sectional study of 685 373 women enrolled in a large commercial health maintenance organization plan in Michigan, rates of breast cancer screening, cervical cancer screening, sexually transmitted infection screening, and prescriptions and new insertions for contraceptives all significantly declined in 2020 compared with 2019. For some services, there were small declines in utilization among women residing in zip codes that are lower income with higher proportions of non-White and non–English-speaking residents. Meaning The pandemic has disrupted the utilization of women’s preventive health services and may be associated with increased disparities in access to these services., Importance The association of the COVID-19 pandemic with women’s preventive health care use is unknown. Objective To describe utilization of women’s preventive health services. Design, Setting, and Participants Cross-sectional study of women aged 18 to 74 years enrolled in a commercial health maintenance organization in Michigan. Exposures COVID-19 pandemic (2019-2020). Main Outcomes and Measures Adjusted odds ratios (AORs) of receiving breast cancer screening, cervical cancer screening, sexually transmitted infection (STI) screening, long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) insertions, and pharmacy-obtained contraception, adjusted for month, age, county, zip code characteristics (per-capita income, non-White percentage of population, non–English-proficient percentage of population), and plan designation (primary plan holder vs dependent). Results The study population included 685 373 women aged 18 to 74 years, enrolled for 13 000 715 person-months, of whom 10 061 275 person-months (77.4%) were among women aged 25 to 64 years and 8 020 215 (61.7%) were the primary plan holder, with mean zip code per capita income of $33 708, 20.2% mean zip code non-White population, and 3.4% mean zip code non–English-speaking population. For services requiring an in-person visit (breast cancer screening, cervical cancer screening, STI testing, and LARC insertions), utilization declined by 60% to 90% during the spring of 2020, with a nadir in April 2020, after which utilization for all services recovered to close to 2019 levels by July 2020. Claims for pharmacy-obtained hormonal contraceptives in 2020 were consistently 15% to 30% lower than 2019. The AORs of a woman receiving a given preventive service in 2020 compared with 2019 were significantly lower for breast cancer screening (AOR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.79-0.80), cervical cancer screening (AOR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.80-0.81), STI screening (AOR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.82-0.84), LARC insertion (AOR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.84-0.90), and pharmacy-obtained contraception (AOR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.72-0.74) (all P

Out-of-pocket costs for women who undergo colposcopy are common, significant, and have increased over time.

Background Cost sharing may impede postpartum contraceptive use. We evaluated the association between out-of-pocket costs and long-acting reversible contraceptive (LARC) insertion among commercially insured postpartum women. Methods Using the Clinformatics Data Mart, we examined out-of-pocket costs for LARC insertions at 0 to 3 and 4–60 days postpartum among women in employer-sponsored health plans from 2013 to 2016. Patient costs were estimated by summing copayment, coinsurance, and deductible payments for LARC services (device + placement). Multivariable logistic regression evaluated the association between plan cost sharing for LARC services (at least one beneficiary with >$200 cost share) and LARC insertion by 60 days postpartum (yes/no). Results We identified 396,073 deliveries among women in 51,797 employer-based plans. Overall, LARC placement by 60 days postpartum was observed after 5.2% (n = 20,604) of deliveries. Inpatient LARC insertion (n = 233; 0.06% of deliveries) was less common than outpatient LARC insertion (n = 20,375; 5.14% of deliveries). Cost sharing was observed in 23.4% of LARC insertions (inpatient IUD: median, $50.00; range, $0.93–5,055.91; inpatient implant: median, $11.91; range, $2.49–650.14; outpatient IUD: median, $25.00; range, $0.01–3,354.80; outpatient implant: median, $27.20; range, $0.18–2,444.01). Among 5,895 plans with at least one LARC insertion and after adjusting for patient age, poverty status, race/ethnicity, region, and plan type, women in plans with cost sharing of more than $200 demonstrated lower odds of LARC use by 60 days postpartum (odds ratio, 0.74; 95% confidence interval, 0.71–0.77). Conclusions Cost sharing for postpartum LARC is associated with use, suggesting that out-of-pocket costs may impede LARC access for some commercially insured postpartum women. Reducing out-of-pocket costs for the most effective forms of contraception may increase use.

Objective: To determine the influence of delivery hospital on the rate of vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC). Study Design: This retrospective cohort study used claims data from Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Michigan. Women with a prior cesarean and a singleton livebirth between 2012 and 2016 were included. We calculated the hospital-specific risk-standardized VBAC rates and median odds ratio as a measure of variation. Result: Hospital-level adjusted rates varied nearly 10-fold (3.7%-35.5%). Compared to the lowest volume hospitals (1st quartile), the likelihood of VBAC increased for those in the 2nd (adjusted OR 2.75 [95% CI 1.23-6.17]), 3rd (adjusted OR 3.73 [95% CI 1.59-8.75]), and 4th quartiles (adjusted OR 2.9 [95% CI 1.11-7.72]). The median OR suggested significant variation by hospital after adjustment. Conclusion: The delivery hospital itself explains a large amount of the variation in rates of VBAC after adjustment for patient and hospital characteristics.

BackgroundThe Centers for Disease Control and Prevention prioritized healthcare personnel for the first phase of COVID-19 vaccination in the United States to keep critical healthcare infrastructure open and functioning, but vaccine hesitancy may limit vaccine uptake.ObjectiveTo evaluate vaccine intentions among healthcare workers eligible for COVID-19 vaccination and explore differences by sociodemographic and occupational characteristics.DesignFrom February 1-15, 2021, we conducted a cross-sectional, opt-in online survey at a Midwest U.S. academic healthcare center that began vaccinating employees in December 2020.ParticipantsThe entire employee workforce of the study site was eligible.Main MeasuresCOVID-19 vaccination intention, categorized as Received/Scheduled/ASAP, Not Now, and Not Ever. Logistic regression models to assess the relationship between demographic and occupational characteristics and intention to receive COVID-19 vaccination.Key ResultsMost participants (n=11,387, of 39,259 individual and group email accounts invited) had received or were scheduled to receive the COVID-19 vaccine (n=9081, 79.8%) or planned to receive it as soon as possible (n=546, 4.8%), while fewer were hesitant (Not Now, n=954, 8.4%; Not Ever, n=369, 3.2%). In multivariable logistic regression models predicting vaccine intention, physicians (aOR 22.2, 9.1-54.3), trainees (aOR 5.9, 3.0-11.4), and nurse practitioners/nurse midwives/physician assistants (aOR 1.9, 1.2-3.0) were significantly more likely to demonstrate vaccine acceptance, compared to nurses, whereas other clinical staff were significantly less likely (aOR 0.8, 0.6-0.9). Prior infection with COVID-19, gender, race/ethnicity, and age were all significantly associated with vaccine intention. Overall, 29.6% reported at least one concern about COVID-19 vaccination.ConclusionsIn a large, diverse sample of healthcare workers, over 11% delayed COVID-19 vaccination when it was available to them, with notable variation in vaccine hesitancy across professional roles and demographic groups. Our findings suggest immediate opportunities to empathetically engage those with COVID-19 vaccine concerns and optimize vaccine coverage across our healthcare system.

Mentorship is defined as a dynamic, reciprocal relationship in a work environment between an advanced-career incumbent (mentor) and a beginner (mentee) aimed at promoting the career development of both. Effective mentors are essential for helping people identify and leverage their “golden nugget”—their unique combination of interests, skills, and life experiences that can add value to our world. Highly effective mentors always have their mentee’s backs; take the mentee where they want to go, not where the mentor went; create a dynamic of bi-directional learning, where the mentor learns as much as the mentee; foster a positive culture of mentorship; think beyond their own lived experiences at work; act as upstanders for workplace equity; and use self-reflection to constantly strive for mentorship excellence. In this chapter, we illustrate these core principles of effective mentorship, using stories from our own experiences as mentees and mentors and through case studies exploring common mentorship pitfalls.

Each year, nearly 4 million pregnant patients in the United States receive prenatal care-a crucial preventive service that improves pregnancy outcomes for mothers and their children. National guidelines currently recommend 12-14 in-person prenatal visits, a schedule that has remained unchanged since 1930. When scrutinizing the standard prenatal visit schedule, it becomes clear that prenatal care is overdue for a redesign. We have strong evidence of the benefits of prenatal services, such as screening for gestational diabetes and maternal vaccination. However, how to deliver these services is not clear. Studies of prenatal services consistently demonstrate that such care can be delivered in fewer than 14 visits and that patients do not need to visit clinics in person to receive all maternity services. Telemedicine has emerged as a promising care delivery option for patients seeking greater flexibility, and early trials leveraging virtual care and remote monitoring have shown positive maternal and fetal outcomes with high patient satisfaction. Our institution has worked for the past year on a new prenatal care pathway. Our initial work assessed the literature, elicited patient perspectives, and captured the insights of experts in patient-centered care delivery. There are 2 key principles that guide prenatal care redesign: (1) design care delivery around essential services, using in-person care for services that cannot be delivered remotely and offering video visits for other essential services, and (2) creation of flexible services for anticipatory guidance and psychosocial support that allow patients to tailor support to meet their needs through opt-in programs. The rise of coronavirus disease 2019 prompted us to extend this early work and rapidly implement a redesigned prenatal care pathway. In this study, we outline our experience in transitioning to a new prenatal care model with 4 in-person visits, 1 ultrasound visit, and 4 virtual visits (the 4-1-4 prenatal plan). We then explore how insights from this implementation can inform patient-centered prenatal care redesign during and beyond the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic.

Prenatal care is one of the most widely used preventive care services in the United States, yet prenatal care delivery recommendations have remained largely unchanged since just before World War II. The current prenatal care model can be improved to better serve modern patients and the health care providers who care for them in three key ways: 1) focusing more on promotion of health and wellness as opposed to primarily focusing on medical complications, 2) flexibly incorporating patient preferences, and 3) individualizing care. As key policymakers and stakeholders grapple with higher maternity care costs and poorer outcomes, including lagging access, equity, and maternal and infant morbidity and mortality in the United States compared with other high-income countries, the opportunity to improve prenatal care has been given insufficient attention. In this manuscript, we present a new conceptual model for prenatal care that incorporates both patients' medical and social needs into four phenotypes, and use human-centered design methods to describe how better matching patient needs with prenatal services can increase the use of high-value services and decrease the use of low-value services. Finally, we address some of the key challenges to implementing right-sized prenatal care, including capturing outcomes through research and payment.

PURPOSE: NIH career development awards require a mandatory allocation of effort to research and training. We sought to understand pressures perceived by award recipients to change working time allocation or to misrepresent effort, and whether these perceptions differed by gender. METHODS: In 2010–2011 and 2014, the authors surveyed 1719 K08 and K23 career development awardee recipients. Questions evaluated perceived pressure to change working time allocation or misrepresent it. Multivariable logistic regression modeling of pressure to misrepresent time evaluated associations with individual and basic job characteristics. RESULTS: Of the 1,719 faculty in the initial target population, 493 women and 573 men (1,066, 62%) responded at both time points. Most respondents reported feeling pressure to increase time spent on professional activities other than their K award-related research or career development or to decrease time on their K award-related research. The likelihood of perceiving pressure differed significantly by gender: 68% of women vs 55% of men (P < .001). A minority reported perceiving pressure to misrepresent professional time (women, 29%, vs men, 27%, P = .52). Multivariable analysis revealed that pressure to misrepresent professional time was less likely among respondents at institutions with the most extramural funding (P = .02). A significant pairwise interaction between gender and K award type suggested that female K08 awardees had higher odds than male peers of perceiving pressure to misrepresent time. CONCLUSIONS: Most K-award recipients feel pressure to do more non-K-related activities, and more than a quarter feel pressure to misrepresent effort. Additional research is needed to evaluate the proportion of academic medical faculty who actually misrepresent professional effort. Additional research is needed to evaluate the proportion of academic medical faculty who actually misrepresent professional effort.

The Affordable Care Act (ACA) requires employer-based insurance plans to cover maternity services, but plans are allowed to impose cost sharing such as copayments and deductibles for these services. This study aimed to evaluate trends in cost sharing for maternity care among working women in employer-based plans, before and after the ACA. Our data indicate that between 2008 and 2015, average out-of-pocket spending for maternity care rose among women with employer-based insurance. This increase was largely driven by increased spending among women with deductibles. When we controlled for potential confounders, we found that out-of-pocket spending was higher for lower-income working women in 2008-13, but disparities disappeared in 2014-15 because of a continued rise in spending among higher-income working women. Policies that aim to lower out-of-pocket spending for maternity care could reduce a significant financial burden on families.

This study examines Texas independent dispute resolution payment outcomes for clinicians and compares them with arbitration benchmarks.

Inpatient insertion of long-acting reversible contraceptives (LARC) (intrauterine devices and implants) is increasingly offered to women immediately after childbirth. Enthusiasm for this approach stems from robust safety, effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness data and responsiveness to women's needs and preferences. Although clinical evidence for immediate postpartum LARC is well-established, the ethical implications of enhancing access to this care have not been fully considered. Contraceptive policies and practices often embody a tension between fostering liberal availability and potentially coercive promotion of some methods. Historical contraceptive policies and contemporary disparities in LARC use point to the need to consider whether health policies and health care practices support all women's reproductive wishes. Immediate postpartum LARC services need to be designed and implemented with the goal of ensuring autonomy and equity in postpartum contraceptive care. To this end, these services should include strategic plans to promote universal availability, prevent coercion, and enable device removal.

Introduction Immediate postpartum long-acting, reversible contraception (LARC)—providing intrauterine devices (IUDs) and contraceptive implants immediately following birth—is an effective strategy to prevent unintended pregnancies and improve birth spacing. We measured US certified nurse-midwives’ (CNMs') and certified midwives’ (CMs') knowledge, training needs, current practice, and perceived barriers to providing immediate postpartum LARC. Methods We invited currently practicing CNM and CM members of the American College of Nurse-Midwives to complete an online survey about their knowledge and experience with the use of LARC and analyzed eligible questionnaires using descriptive statistics. Results Of 4609 eligible midwives, 794 responded (17% response rate). Most were female (99.5%) and non-Hispanic white (92.1%), with 45.0% attending births in urban settings. Responses revealed multiple knowledge gaps related to IUD expulsion rates and appropriateness of immediate postpartum LARC in certain clinical scenarios. Only 10.1% of respondents reported feeling confident to insert an immediate postpartum IUD and 43.3% an implant. Many reported desiring additional training in immediate postpartum IUD (63.5%) and implant (22.8%) insertion; few reported access to such training (IUD, 19.9%; implant, 15.2%). Most respondents had never inserted an immediate postpartum IUD (90.7%) or implant (86.8%). The most commonly cited barriers to immediate postpartum LARC provision were that it is not standard practice (IUD, 40.9%; implant, 39.0%) or is not available (IUD, 27.8%; implant, 34.8%) at one's institution and feeling inadequately trained (IUD, 26.5%; implant, 10.7%). Discussion Nine in 10 midwife respondents have never inserted an IUD or implant immediately postpartum, but more than half indicated they would like the opportunity to provide these services. Our findings highlight opportunities to enhance the immediate postpartum LARC-related knowledge and skills of the midwife workforce. They also suggest that logistic and institutional barriers to immediate postpartum LARC access must be removed in order to make this evidence-based reproductive health service available to all women who desire it.

Regulations regarding bathroom use by transgender people affect youth across the United States. This study examines youth opinions on bathroom use regulations. Data were obtained from MyVoice, a weekly text messaging survey of youth aged 14-24 years. Youth were recruited nationally at community events and online; Southeast Michigan was overrepresented. Mixed methods analysis was performed using grounded theory methodology. The majority of respondents (n = 683) were white (71.4%) and had education beyond high school (56.5%). Most (79%) stated that bathroom use by transgender people should not be restricted, rationalizing: 1) bathroom use is private and should be a personal decision; 2) choosing bathrooms is a matter of equality, freedom, and human rights; 3) transgender people are not sexual perpetrators; and 4) forcing transgender people to use particular bathrooms puts them at risk. Contrary to the current policy in many schools, respondents do not support restrictions on bathroom use by transgender people.

Increasing access to effective birth control after childbirth may meet many women's preferences and reduce short interpregnancy interval rates. Eliminating out-of-pocket costs for contraception has been reported to increase the use of the most effective methods among women with employer-based insurance, but the prevalence and effects of patient cost sharing for contraception have not been studied during the postpartum period.This study aimed to examine the association between cost sharing for long-acting reversible contraception and postpartum contraception use patterns and pregnancies in the 12 months after delivery.We conducted a retrospective cohort analysis of commercially insured women undergoing childbirth from 2014 to 2018 using Optum's (Eden Prairie, MN) de-identified Clinformatics Data Mart database. This large national database includes nonretired employees and their dependents who are enrolled in health insurance plans sponsored by large- or medium-sized US-based employers. Women with 12 months of continuous enrollment postpartum were included. Childbirth, pregnancy, and contraceptive method (female sterilization, long-acting reversible contraceptives, other hormonal methods, and no prescription method observed) were identified using claims data. Contraceptive use patterns were observed at 3, 6, and 12 months postpartum and adjusted for individual and plan characteristics. Median out-of-pocket costs were $0 for sterilization and other hormonal methods but nonzero for long-acting reversible contraception. We therefore used simple and multivariable logistic regressions to examine the association between plan-level cost sharing (no cost sharing, $0; low cost sharing,$0-$200; and high cost sharing, ≥$200 out-of-pocket cost) for any long-acting reversible contraceptive insertion and contraceptive use patterns and short interpregnancy interval rates, controlling for age, household income, race and ethnicity, region, and insurance plan type.Among 25,298 plans with cost sharing data, we identified 172,941 women with continuous enrollment for 12 months postpartum, including 82,500 (47.7%) in no cost sharing, 22,595 (13.1%) in low cost sharing, and 67,846 (39.2%) in high cost sharing plans. The percentage of postpartum women in the study sample using any prescription contraceptive method was 39.5% by 3 months, 43.8% by 6 months, and 46.0% by 12 months. At all time points, postpartum women in no cost sharing plans had a higher predicted probability of long-acting reversible contraceptive use (eg, at 12 months: no cost sharing, 22.0%; low cost-sharing, 17.5%; high cost sharing, 18.3%; P.001) and a lower predicted probability of no prescription method use (eg, at 12 months: no cost sharing, 51.8%; low cost sharing, 55.0%; high cost sharing, 54.9%; P.001) than those in low or high cost sharing plans. Predicted probabilities of female sterilization and other hormonal method use did not differ substantively by plan cost sharing for long-acting reversible contraception at any time point. The proportion of women experiencing a short interpregnancy interval was low (1.9% by 3 months, 1.9% by 6 months, 2.0% by 12 months) and did not differ by plan cost sharing for long-acting reversible contraception at any time point.Out-of-pocket costs for long-acting reversible contraception influence the method of contraception used by postpartum women with employer-based insurance. Eliminating financial barriers to long-acting reversible contraception access after childbirth may help women initiate their preferred method and increase the use of long-acting reversible contraceptives among interested women who otherwise might utilize less effective methods.

Active immunization during pregnancy for maternal and neonatal benefit is a remarkably promising strategy to reduce infectious morbidity in both women and infants. The aim of this review is to present current clinical guidelines for vaccination during pregnancy and review evidence-based strategies for the implementation of maternal immunization recommendations. Observational studies, clinical trials, cost-effectiveness analyses, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses were evaluated to generate the evidence base for this review. In addition, recommendations from major national professional and public health organizations were examined. We present current clinical recommendations for vaccination during pregnancy and review medical and public health strategies to implement these guidelines. We also discuss a research agenda to advance the field of maternal immunization and achieve further improvements in maternal and child health.

BACKGROUND: Although safe and effective intrauterine devices (IUDs) are underutilized in the United States. The objective of this study was to determine whether patient- and clinician-initiated discussions were associated with the duration of Mirena (52 mg levonorgestrel-releasing) IUD use. METHODS: Retrospective chart review identified Mirena IUDs that were placed and removed for reasons other than the desire for pregnancy from January 1 2005 to January 1 2012 at 1 academic center (n = 148). Multivariable linear regression examined the independent association between duration of use and source of discussion initiation. RESULTS: IUDs placed after patient-initiated discussions were used for 473 days longer than those placed after clinician-initiated discussions (P < .001). CONCLUSION: Patient-initiated discussions of Mirena IUDs are associated with a significantly longer duration of use. Patient influences outside the clinical encounter may be important in optimizing use. (c) Copyright 2016 by the American Board of Family Medicine.

Objective Long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) is safe, effective and cost-saving when provided immediately postpartum but currently underutilized due to nonreimbursement by Medicaid and other insurers. The objectives of this study were to (a) determine which state Medicaid agencies provide specific reimbursement for immediate postpartum LARC and (b) identify modifiable policy-level barriers and facilitators of immediate postpartum LARC access. Study Design We conducted semistructured telephone interviews with representatives of 40 Medicaid agencies to characterize payment methodology for immediate postpartum LARC. We coded transcripts using grounded theory and content analysis principles. Results Three categories of immediate postpartum LARC payment methodology emerged: state Medicaid agency (a) provides separate or increased bundled payment ( n =15), (b) is considering providing enhanced payment ( n =9) or (c) is not considering enhanced payment ( n =16). Two major themes emerged related to Medicaid decision-making about immediate postpartum LARC coverage: (a) Health effects: States with payment for immediate postpartum LARC frequently cited improved maternal/child health outcomes as motivating their reimbursements. Conversely, states without payment expressed misinformation about LARC's clinical effects and lack of advocacy from local providers about clinical need for this service. (b) Financial implications: States providing payment emphasized overall cost savings. Conversely, states without reimbursement expressed concern about immediate budget constraints and potential adverse impact on existing global payment methodology for inpatient care. Conclusions Many states have recently provided Medicaid coverage of immediate postpartum LARC, and several other states are considering such coverage. Addressing misinformation about clinical effects and concerns about cost-effectiveness of immediate postpartum LARC may promote adoption of immediate postpartum LARC reimbursement in Medicaid agencies currently without it. Implications Medicaid policy for reimbursement of immediate postpartum LARC is evolving rapidly across the US. Our findings suggest several concrete strategies to remove policy-level barriers and promote facilitators of immediate postpartum LARC.

This cross-sectional study assesses the association of the elimination of cost sharing for contraception under the Patient and Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) with birth rates by income level among commercially insured women., Key Points Question Was the elimination of cost sharing for contraception under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act associated with a change in birth rates among women in different income groups? Findings In this cross-sectional study, the estimated probability of birth decreased most precipitously among women in the lowest income group from 8.0% in 2014 to 6.2% in 2018. The probability of a birth also decreased significantly among women in higher income groups, but this decrease was smaller in magnitude. Meaning These findings suggest that contraception insurance coverage without consumer cost sharing may be associated with decreased income-related disparities in unintended birth rates., Importance Reducing out-of-pocket costs is associated with improved patterns of contraception use. It is unknown whether reducing out-of-pocket costs is associated with fewer births. Objective To evaluate changes in birth rates by income level among commercially insured women before (2008-2013) and after (2014-2018) the elimination of cost sharing for contraception under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA). Design, Setting, and Participants This cross-sectional study used data from Clinformatics Data Mart database from January 1, 2008, to December 31, 2018, for women aged 15 to 45 years who were enrolled in an employer-based health plan and had pregnancy benefits for at least 1 year. Women without household income information and women with evidence of having undergone a hysterectomy were excluded. Exposure Section 2713 of the ACA. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was the proportion of reproductive-aged women with a live birth by year (measured yearly from 2008 to 2018 [11 time points]) within 3 income categories. The secondary outcome was the distribution of contraceptive method fills in 3 categories by year: (1) most effective methods (long-acting reversible contraception or sterilization), (2) moderately effective methods (pill, patch, ring, and injectable), and (3) no prescription or surgical method. Results The analytic sample included 4 590 989 women (mean [SD] age; 30.8 [9.1] years in 2013; 3 069 053 White [66.9%]) enrolled in 47 721 health plans. A total of 500 898 participants (40.8%) resided in households with incomes less than 400% of the federal poverty level in 2013. In all 3 years (2008, 2013, and 2018), women in the lowest income category were younger than women in the other income groups (median range, 21-22 years vs 30-34 years) and in households with a higher median number of dependents (9-10 vs 2-4). There was an associated decrease in births in all income groups in the period after the elimination of out-of-pocket costs. The estimated probability of birth decreased most precipitously among women in the lowest income group from 8.0% (95% CI, 7.4%-8.5%) in 2014 to 6.2% (95% CI, 5.7%-6.7%) in 2018, representing a 22.2% decrease (P