Search

Introduction: Previous research has documented how the implementation of the 2019 Title X Final Rule reduced the Title X network capacity and led to decreases in patient numbers. Our objective was to examine the relationship between the Rule and patients' reproductive health care access and outcomes. Methods: Our analysis draws on panel data from patients recruited when seeking publicly funded family planning care in Iowa between May 2018 and February 2019 who completed a baseline survey and agreed to be contacted for follow-up surveys at 6-, 12-, 18-, and/or 24-month intervals. We employ a difference-in-difference (DiD) approach, comparing reproductive health outcomes (access to care and contraceptive use) of respondents who had recently received care at sites that eventually left the Title X system following the Rule, the exposed group, to outcomes among those who had recently received care at sites that did not shift from being in the Title X system to exiting it, the control group, both before and after its implementation. Results: After adjusting for respondents' demographic characteristics in the DiD models, we found that those in the exposure group were 11% less likely to have received recent contraceptive care compared to respondents in the control group after the implementation of the Title X Final Rule when examining the full study period (p <.01). When examining only the pre-COVID 19 time period, we found that respondents in the exposure group were 13% less likely to have been using a provider-involved method (p < 0.01), 11% less likely to have been using a method that carries a cost (p < 0.05), and 18% less likely to report being satisfied with their method (p < 0.001) compared to respondents in the control group. Conclusions: Using Iowa as a case study to understand how the 2019 Title X Final Rule may have changed family planning patients' sexual and reproductive health outcomes, we found evidence of a negative association of the Rule with patients' access to, and use of, contraception. Policy Implications: These findings expand the evidence base of the influence of the 2019 Title X Final Rule on the Title X health care system and its capacity to provide SRH care by highlighting the trickle-down effects of the Rule on patients themselves. Policies that restrict access to any aspect of sexual and reproductive health care, including contraception and abortion, are in direct conflict with people's realization of reproductive autonomy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In recent years, there have been several state and federal policies that have disrupted access to publicly supported family planning care in the United States, including the 2019 rule that altered the federal Title X family planning program. In late 2020, we conducted in-depth interviews with health care providers from 55 facilities providing family planning care in Arizona, Iowa, and Wisconsin with the aim of learning how sites were affected by policy changes. We identified perceived effects on clinic finances, patient confidentiality, contraceptive counselling and service provision, and options counselling resulting from state and federal policy changes. Some clinics lost funding and had to pass some of the cost of services on to patients, raising new confidentiality concerns and creating new burdens on staff to carry out financial counselling with patients. Other sites had to grapple with restrictions on the pregnancy options counselling that they could provide, concentrate counselling on fertility awareness-based methods, and increase efforts to include parents/guardians in the care of adolescent patients. State and federal policies impact how publicly supported family planning care is provided, and compromise efforts to provide patient-centred care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In recent years, there have been several state and federal policies that have disrupted access to publicly supported family planning care in the United States, including the 2019 rule that altered the federal Title X family planning program. In late 2020, we conducted in-depth interviews with health care providers from 55 facilities providing family planning care in Arizona, Iowa, and Wisconsin with the aim of learning how sites were affected by policy changes. We identified perceived effects on clinic finances, patient confidentiality, contraceptive counselling and service provision, and options counselling resulting from state and federal policy changes. Some clinics lost funding and had to pass some of the cost of services on to patients, raising new confidentiality concerns and creating new burdens on staff to carry out financial counselling with patients. Other sites had to grapple with restrictions on the pregnancy options counselling that they could provide, concentrate counselling on fertility awareness-based methods, and increase efforts to include parents/guardians in the care of adolescent patients. State and federal policies impact how publicly supported family planning care is provided, and compromise efforts to provide patient-centred care.

Objective: To describe receipt of person-centered contraceptive counseling among reproductive-aged women in the United States who sought contraceptive care at Title X clinics, non-Title X public clinics, and private clinics.Study Design: We conducted a secondary analysis of the 2017-2019 wave of the National Survey of Family Growth (NSFG). The sample included female respondents ages 15-49 who received contraceptive services in the past year and completed the Person-Centered Contraceptive Counseling (PCCC) measure, a quality metric evaluating interpersonal quality of the care received. We used multivariable logistic regression to estimate the predicted probability of receiving person-centered contraceptive counseling by source of care, adjusted for individual-level characteristics.Results: Of 2225 (weighted n = 26,599,620) eligible respondents, 6.9% received care at a Title X clinic, 8.2% at a non-Title X public clinic, and 84.9% at a private clinic. The adjusted predicted probability of receiving person-centered contraceptive counseling among respondents attending private clinics was 50.6% (95% CI 46.3%-54.8%) compared with 51.3% (95% CI 40.4%-62.3%) at Title X clinics and 52.4% (95% CI 44.0%-60.7%) at other public clinics. Respondents with incomes ≥300% above the federal poverty level (FPL) had higher odds of reporting receipt of person-centered counseling compared to those with incomes below 100% of the FPL (aOR = 2.12; 95% CI 1.47-3.06). Non-Latina Black respondents had lower odds of receiving person-centered contraceptive counseling (aOR = 0.69; 95% CI 0.51-0.94), compared to non-Latina white respondents.Conclusion: Title X clinics perform as well as the private sector in delivering person-centered contraceptive counseling.Implications: Title X clinics provide quality person-centered contraceptive counseling on par with the private sector, despite serving populations that are often less likely to report high quality care. Broad implementation of the PCCC measure will permit tracking person-centered contraceptive care across diverse practice settings and populations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Historically, access to contraception has been supported in a bipartisan way, best exemplified by consistent congressional funding of Title X—the only federal program specifically focused on providing affordable reproductive health care to American residents. However, in an era of partisan polarization, Title X has become a political and symbolic pawn, in part because of its connection to family planning organizations like Planned Parenthood. The conflicts around Title X highlight the effects of intertwining abortion politics and contraception policy, particularly as they relate to reproductive justice and gendered policy making. Family planning organizations like Planned Parenthood have responded to these battles by bowing out of the Title X network. To what extent have contraception deserts—places characterized by inequitable access to Title X—developed or expanded in response to policy changes related to contraception and reproductive health? What is the demographic makeup of these spaces of inequality? We leverage data from the Office of Population Affairs and the U.S. Census Bureau and use the integrated two-step floating catchment area method to illustrate the effects of a major change in the Title X network in 10 states. Our results reveal the widespread human ramifications of increasing constraints on family planning organizations as a result of quiet but insidious federal bureaucratic rule changes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: In 2019, the Trump administration introduced rule changes, colloquially known as the "Domestic Gag Rule," to the federal Title X program. As a result, many grantees withdrew from the program. This study aims to assess the impact of the rule change on service provision within the Title X program, both while the rule was in place and in the period following its reversal., Study Design: We obtained disaggregated Family Planning Annual Report data for all states from 2018 to 2022. Using a previously created variable determining the proportion of each state's Title X capacity loss from the 2019 rule (0%, 1-24%, 25-50%, 50-89%, 90-99%, 100%), we conducted mixed effects linear regression exploring outcomes of interest (number of total clients served; number of female/male contraceptive methods provided; contraceptive method mix; sexually transmitted infection [STI] services provided) prerule change (2018), during the rule change (2019-2021), and postrule change (2022)., Results: During the rule change period, the average total number of services Title X provided decreased by 16% nationwide from the prerule change period. However, states with higher levels of reduced capacity saw significant additional losses in reproductive health service provision. The total number of clients, the number of female/male contraceptive methods, and the number of STI services provided did not improve in the postrule change period. In addition, the number of moderately effective methods provided decreased significantly during the rule change period and continued to decline postrule change., Conclusions: Title X services were significantly impacted by the rule change, and subsequent recovery is slow., Implications: During the 2019-2021 Title X rule change, there was a nationwide decrease in reproductive health services provided (contraceptive services, STI testing) through Title X. States with higher capacity loss had a more significant decline. Postrule change, service levels did not return to prerule change levels, indicating a slow recovery., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

To describe the changes in contraceptive method use and mix among Colorado Title X clients following the 2009 Colorado Family Planning Initiative (CFPI), which allowed Colorado Title X providers to offer all contraceptive methods without medically unnecessary barriers. Using data on all visits to Colorado Title X clinics between 2007 and 2016 for women aged 10–49 years, we described trends in contraceptive method use by age group and race/ethnicity prior to and following the implementation of CFPI. The implementation of CFPI saw an abrupt increase in Title X visits. Visits subsequently declined steeply for non-Hispanic White clients while visits by Hispanic clients remained at elevated levels. During CFPI, the use of long-acting reversible contraceptives increased while the use of oral contraceptive pills decreased. Nonetheless, oral contraceptive pills remained the most common method used by Title X clients throughout the study period. Changes in the method mix varied by age and race/ethnicity. Method switching was relatively uncommon among established Title X clinic users. CFPI, which removed financial barriers to the most expensive methods, was associated with increases in the use of long-acting reversible contraceptives and changes in method mix that varied by age group and race/ethnicity. CFPI removed barriers to previously inaccessible methods that contributed to changes in the method mix at Title X clinics. That these changes were not uniform across ages and race/ethnicities emphasize that subgroup variation in family planning policy impact stems from heterogeneity in barriers to care and method-specific unmet demand. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 2019, Hawai'i ended its Title X program resulting in a loss of federal family planning funds. Additionally, physician shortages have decreased family planning resources available to patients. The objective of this study was to assess contraception availability by determining the number and location of healthcare providers in Hawai'i that prescribed at least one form of contraception. A list of healthcare providers was compiled using Google searches, major health insurance, and hospital provider directories. Providers were organized by physical location (ie, address). Each location was contacted to inquire about each provider's ability to prescribe different forms of contraception (eg, intrauterine device, implant, injection, pill, patch, or ring). Of the 1,020 locations contacted, 274 prescribed at least one form of contraception. Of the 1,810 providers surveyed at these locations, 744 prescribed at least one form of contraception. In regard to insurance, 201 locations and 609 providers accepted at least one form of Medicaid. Most prescribing providers were located on the island of O'ahu. The majority of providers across the state prescribed the pill, patch, or ring. There are many additional barriers that were not addressed in this study, including factors that affect physician prescribing practices. Identifying these barriers is important to further address gaps in contraceptive accessibility. Consideration of improved support for training in specialties such as Family Medicine, Internal Medicine, and Pediatrics can expand access to contraception within primary care settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To understand how Title X providers currently engage with fertility awareness-based methods (FABMs) for pregnancy prevention in Title X clinics across the United States. Materials and Methods: We developed a survey to assess knowledge of fertility for purposes of pregnancy prevention, attitudes toward FABMs use for pregnancy prevention, and practices when patients request FABMs for pregnancy prevention. Results: In total, 329 participants who met all inclusion criteria completed the survey. Respondents were generally highly knowledgeable on fertility, felt neutrally toward FABMs or thought they were a nonviable option for most women, and were likely to respond to patient requests for FABMs for pregnancy prevention by providing information. Qualitative responses included several barriers to provision of FABMs for pregnancy prevention and few successes to provision. Conclusions: Fertility knowledge and discussion of specific methods increased with the number of methods included in the clinic's written materials or with the number of different FABMs someone at that clinic had been trained on. Significant clinician or administrative barriers may exist to offering FABMs to patients. Incorporating up-to-date information on a range of FABMs?rather than treating them as one method?into contraceptive counseling represents an opportunity to increase the contraceptive offering for clients who want them, leading to increased patient satisfaction and successful family planning outcomes.

Background: HIV pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is underutilized by US women. Cost and resource concerns are barriers to PrEP delivery in settings that see men. Family planning clinics may be ideal PrEP delivery settings for women, but as they are not uniform in their clinical services, cost and resource concerns may vary. Objective: We examined factors that influence perceptions of costs and resources related to PrEP delivery in Title X–funded family planning clinics in Southern states, which overlaps with high HIV-burden areas. Design: We conducted a web-based survey among a convenience sample of clinicians and administrators of Title X clinics across 18 Southern states (DHHS regions III, IV, VI). We compared cost- and resource-related survey items and other clinic- and county-level variables between clinics by whether their clinics also provided other primary care services. We analyzed interviews for cost and resource themes. Participants: Title X clinic staff in the South. Key Results: Among 283 unique clinics, a greater proportion of clinics that also provided primary care currently provided PrEP compared with those that did not provide primary care (27.8% vs. 18.3%, p = 0.06), but this difference was not statistically significant. Among 414 respondents in clinics that were not providing PrEP, those in clinics with primary care services were more likely to respond that they had the necessary financial resources (p < 0.01) and staffing (p < 0.01) for PrEP implementation compared to those without primary care services. In interviews, respondents differed on concerns about costs of labs and staffing based on whether their clinic had concomitant primary care services or not. Conclusions: Among publicly funded Southern family planning clinics, current PrEP provision was higher among clinics with concomitant primary care. Among clinics not providing PrEP, those with concomitant primary care services have lower perceived cost and resource barriers and therefore may be optimal for expanding PrEP among women. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Assess the impact of the Be Your Own Baby (BYOB) public awareness campaign including population-level exposure, the effectiveness of ad platforms, and the effect of the campaign on family planning clinic attendance, the campaign's primary goal. Data Sources: The study relied on administrative data on traffic and engagement from the campaign's website, population survey data measuring campaign exposure, and clinic attendance volumes from state-by-year restricted-use versions of the Office of Population Affairs' Family Planning Annual Reports (2006-2018). Study Design: Bivariate analyses were used to assess website traffic and engagement and population-level exposure across key subgroups. We then used the synthetic control method to examine the impact of the BYOB campaign on per capita Title X clinic attendance among the target demographic, women 18-29 years of age. Data Collection/Extraction Methods: Not applicable. We relied on secondary sources. Principal Findings: Primary media platforms used by the campaign included social media, digital display, streaming audio, YouTube, and search. Website traffic was driven primarily by digital display ads, but engagement was highest for search. Our results suggest nearly 12% of Delaware women 18-29 years of age were exposed to the campaign. However, exposure was measured at the end of the campaign and was likely much larger during its peak. Our results indicated that the campaign was associated with between 13 and 23 additional Title X clinic visits per 1000 women compared with 110 users per 1000 at baseline in 2014. Conclusions: Our findings suggest the BYOB campaign was successful at increasing clinic attendance among the target demographic. These results have important implications for other programs seeking to use public awareness messaging to increase participation in the health care system and are especially important for Title X administrators who have faced declining patient volumes for over 10 years. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: We describe provision of contraception to adolescents at Oregon school-based health centers (SBHCs). We examine trends over time, by race/ethnicity, and by Title X clinic status and test whether these factors are associated with provision of long-acting reversible contraception (LARC; intrauterine devices/IUDs and implants).Study Design: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 33 SBHCs participating in a shared electronic health record 2012-2016. We identified 20,339 contraception provision visits to 5,934 adolescent females ages 14-19 using diagnosis and procedure codes. We used logistic regression to evaluate the association of clinic Title X status, race/ethnicity, and year with receipt of LARC, controlling for individual-, clinic-, and residence-level factors. We calculated adjusted probabilities.Results: Provision of IUDs and implants increased at Oregon SBHCs between 2012 and 2016. IUD provision increased almost 5-fold, (from 0.9% to 4.4% of contraception provision visits), and implants increased approximately 6.5-fold (from 1.1% to 7.2%). More adolescent contraception provision visits occurred at Title X SBHCs, which had greater than twice the adjusted probability of providing LARCs than non-Title X SBHCs (4.4% versus 1.7%). After adjusting for adolescent-, clinic-, and residence-level covariates, non-white adolescents had lower probabilities of receiving LARC methods than white adolescents.Conclusions: SBHCs play an important role in providing access to contraceptive services to adolescents in Oregon. Access to IUDs and implants is increasing over time in SBHCs, particularly those that participate in the Title X program.Implications: Adolescents have expanding access to IUDs and implants in SBHCs over time in Oregon. Participation in the Title X program can help further increase access to effective contraception in SBHCs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A shockwave rocked Title X programs on March 30, when the federal government's latest round of funding left many facilities with huge budget shortfalls. The Biden administration had reversed the gag rule and asked Congress for more Title X funds. Yet, when Title X funding was announced, many programs received the worst cut in their history with the program. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ObjectiveTo compare contraceptive knowledge and use among women seeking emergency contraception (EC) before and after an inner-city clinic began providing structured counseling and offering same-day intrauterine device (IUD) or implant placement to all women seeking EC.Study designFor 8 months before and 21 months after this change in clinic policy, women aged 15-45 who wanted to avoid pregnancy for at least 6 months were asked to complete surveys immediately, 3 and 12 months after their clinic visit. In addition, we abstracted electronic medical record (EMR) data on all women who sought EC (n=328) during this period. We used chi-squared tests to assess pre/post differences in survey and EMR data.ResultsSurveys were completed by 186 women. After the clinic began offering structured counseling, more women had accurate knowledge of the effectiveness of IUDs, immediately and 3 months after their clinic visit. In addition, more women initiated IUD or implant use (survey: 40% vs. 17% preintervention, p=0.04; EMR: 22% vs. 10% preintervention, p=0.01), and fewer had no contraceptive use (survey: 3% vs. 17% preintervention, p

Context: This article focuses on whether, and the extent to which, the resources made available by Title X-the only federal policy aimed specifically at reproductive health care-are equitably accessible. Here, equitable means that barriers to accessing services are lowest for those people who need them most. Methods: The authors use geographic information systems (GIS) and statistical/spatial analysis (specifically the integrated two-step floating catchment area [I2SFCA] method) to study the spatial and nonspatial accessibility of Title X clinics in 2018. Findings: The authors find that contraception deserts vary across the states, with between 17% and 53% of the state population living in a desert. Furthermore, they find that low-income people and people of color are more likely to live in certain types of contraception deserts. Conclusions: The analyses reveal not only a wide range of sizes and shapes of contraception deserts across the US states but also a range of severity of inequity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Differences in contraceptive method use have been noted among women of different races, but studies describing contraceptive method use among Native Hawaiian women have not been published. To examine method choice in this group, the authors conducted a database review of the Hawai'i State Department of Health Title X program. Reviewed were client visit records (CVRs) that health care providers completed for women who were ages 15-44 years, avoiding pregnancy, not currently pregnant, and using a contraceptive method (N=54 513). Because a patient could have had several visits during the study period, the contraceptive method chosen at the last visit was selected for analysis. Statistical analyses included descriptive statistics, bivariate analyses, and logistic regression. The proportion of Native Hawaiian women who selected a highly-effective method of contraception (HEC), defined as an intrauterine device, implant, or permanent contraception, was higher than the proportion of non-Native Hawaiian women who selected an HEC. Overall, 15.4% of Native Hawaiian women during the study period chose HEC, compared to 8.8% of non-Native Hawaiian women. In a logistic regression analysis, Native Hawaiian women ages 15-29 were 1.46 times more likely to use HEC (95% CI: 1.35-1.58) than non-Native Hawaiian women ages 15-29, and Native Hawaiian women ages 30-44 were 1.69 times more likely to use HEC (95% CI: 1.53-1.87) than non-Native Hawaiian women in the same age group. Because Native Hawaiian women are reported to have higher rates of unintended pregnancy in the state compared to other racial groups, additional research exploring contraceptive non-use and pregnancy intention are needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Title X organizations and other groups praised the Biden administration for reversing the draconian changes to the Title X family planning program that were enacted in 2019 under the Trump administration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Describe contraception availability at local health departments (LHDs) serving largely rural populations.Study Design: We invited administrators at LHDs located in four Midwest states to participate in an online survey conducted from September 2017-April 2018. We collected data on clinic staffing, patient population, receipt of Title X funds, and services provided to assess the proportion of LHDs providing any prescription method of contraception; secondary outcomes included healthcare staff training level and other reproductive health services provided.Results: Of 344 LHDs invited, 237 administrators completed the survey (68.9%). Three-quarters served rural populations. One-third (34.6%) provided short-acting hormonal contraception; however, availability varied by state (Kansas: 58.0%, 40/69; Missouri: 37.5%, 33/88; Nebraska: 16.7%, 3/18; Iowa: 9.7%, 6/62; p<.01). Only 8.4% of LHDs provided IUDs; 7.6% provided implants, and 5.9% provided both methods. LHDs in Nebraska and Kansas provided any long-acting method more frequently (Kansas: 17.4%, Nebraska: 16.7%, Iowa: 8.1%, Missouri: 4.6%; p=.04). LHDs receiving Title X funds (27.0%) were much more likely to provide any prescription contraception (85.1% vs. 14.2%, p<.01). Most LHDs relied on registered nurses (RNs) to provide medical care; 81.0% reported that RNs provided care≥20 days per month. Pregnancy testing was widely available in Missouri and Kansas (>87%) and less commonly available in Iowa and Nebraska (<18%) (p<.01).Conclusion: LHDs in these states are currently ill-equipped to offer comprehensive contraceptive services. Women seeking care at LHDs have limited, if any, contraceptive options.Implications: Local health departments in the Midwest, serving a largely rural population, rarely offer prescription contraception, especially long-acting reversible methods. Women residing in settings without broad access to publicly-funded healthcare providers may have limited access to comprehensive contraceptive services. Efforts to ensure rural access are needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Objectives To compare pregnancy options counseling and referral practices at state- and Title X-funded family planning organizations in Texas after enforcement of a policy restricting abortion referrals for providers participating in state-funded programs, which differed from Title X guidelines to provide referrals for services upon request. Study design Between November 2014 and February 2015, we conducted in-depth interviews with administrators at publicly funded family planning organizations in Texas about how they integrated primary care and family planning services, including pregnancy options counseling and referrals for unplanned pregnancies. We conducted a thematic analysis of transcripts related to organizations' pregnancy options counseling and referral practices, and compared themes across organizations that did and did not receive Title X funding. Results Of the 37 organizations with transcript segments on options counseling and referrals, 15 received Title X and 22 relied on state funding only. All Title X-funded organizations but only nine state-funded organizations reported offering pregnancy options counseling. Respondents at state-only-funded organizations often described directing pregnant women exclusively to prenatal care. Regardless of funding source, most organizations provided women a list of agencies offering abortion, adoption and prenatal care. However, some respondents expressed concern that providing other information about abortion would threaten their state funding. In contrast, respondents indicated staff would make appointments for prenatal care, assist with Medicaid applications and, in some instances, directly connect women with adoption-related services. Conclusions Pregnancy options counseling varied by organizations' funding guidelines. Additionally, abortion referrals were less common than referrals for other pregnancy-related care. Implications Programmatic guidelines restricting information on abortion counseling and referrals may adversely affect care for pregnant women at publicly funded family planning organizations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives Few studies have examined the extent to which providers assess pregnancy intentions during clinical encounters. Our objective was to assess temporal trends in documentation of patient pregnancy intentions in electronic health records (EHR). Methods In this retrospective observational study using EHR data from 627,399 female patients visiting 214 family planning centers in 2012-2014, we assessed changes in the prevalence of pregnancy intention documentation with piecewise log-binomial regression models. We examined bivariate associations between patient/visit characteristics and pregnancy intention documentation in each year, and associations between patients' pregnancy intentions and contraceptive methods. Results The proportion of patients with a documented pregnancy intention increased sharply from the end of 2012 (42%) to the midpoint of 2013 (85%; adjusted quarterly prevalence ratio [APR] = 1.40, 95% CI 1.36-1.45). Thereafter, the rate of change slowed as documentation approached the maximum possible frequency (93%; APR = 1.01, 95% CI 1.00-1.02). Documentation varied by all patient/visit characteristics in 2012 and 2013; in 2014, there were no clinically significant differences. Among patients with a documented intention, 97% were not planning a pregnancy in the next year. Women not planning a pregnancy were more likely to use a most/moderately effective contraceptive method than those planning a pregnancy (73 vs. 35%, p < 0.0001). Conclusions for Practice Improvements in pregnancy intention documentation co-occurred with changes to EHR templates (e.g., placement of structured data fields) and with provider-focused initiatives promoting reproductive life planning. Patients' pregnancy intentions aligned with contraceptive use; however, these findings cannot address whether assessment of intentions affects contraceptive use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Purpose A cornerstone of the Title X program is guaranteed access to confidential family planning services regardless of patients' ability to pay. This is particularly important for adolescents and young adults. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) expanded health insurance access for thousands of individuals. But, billing third-party payers for family planning services can result in the generation of explanations of benefits and other communications to the policy holder that may compromise confidentiality for covered dependents. Methods The research team facilitated 12 focus groups with 62 Title X clients in 5 states and conducted interviews with 91 health center key informants in 10 states. Transcripts were coded using NVivo version 10.0. Researchers used deductive coding and grounded theory to search for themes. Results Clients expressed confusion about the difference between confidential services from their health center versus confidential communications from their health insurance plan. Health center staff also highlighted confidentiality issues that may arise from ACA insurance expansion and revealed that clients overall do not understand how health insurance works, particularly younger clients and those that were newly covered under the ACA. Conclusions Many Title X supported health centers will continue not to bill insurance if there are concerns regarding confidentiality, especially with their adolescent and young adult clients. Despite additional revenue sources that have emerged since the passage of the ACA, Title X funding may remain critical for clients who need safe, affordable, and confidential care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The U.S. Supreme Court will hear the multiorganization challenge to the former Trump administration's Title X regulatory changes that caused one out of four Title X providers to leave the program. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Latina-identified immigrants experience multiple barriers to healthcare, including contraception and reproductive care. This can result in lack of access to affordable preventive screenings, such as Pap smears, mammograms, and tests for sexually transmitted infections, according to the authors of a recent study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Family planning providers anticipate positive changes to the Title X program as President Biden announced his administration would roll back the Trump rules that forced hundreds of family planning clinics out of the program. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Essential Access Health and other family planning advocacy organizations petitioned the Supreme Court to review a Court of Appeals decision that upholds the Trump administration's Title X regulations and gag rule. Because of the changes, the number of Title X sites in California dropped from 366 to 238. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The recent Title X changes have proven devastating to women depending on family planning centers for their reproductive healthcare needs. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling upheld the Trump administration's gag rule that prohibits Title X providers from referring patients for abortion care or even answering questions about abortion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Access to a full range of contraceptive methods, including long-acting reversible contraception (LARC), is central to providing quality family planning services. We describe health center-related factors associated with LARC availability, including staff training in LARC insertion/removal and approaches to offering LARC, whether onsite or through referral.Study Design: We analyzed nationally representative survey data collected during 2013-2014 from administrators of publicly funded U.S. health centers that offered family planning. The response rate was 49.3% (n=1615). In addition to descriptive statistics, we used multivariable logistic regression to identify health center characteristics associated with offering both IUDs and implants onsite.Results: Two-thirds (64%) of health centers had staff trained in all three LARC types (hormonal IUD, copper IUD, implant); 21% had no staff trained in any of those contraceptive methods. Half of health centers (52%) offered IUDs (any type) and implants onsite. After onsite provision, informal referral arrangements were the most common way LARC methods were offered. In adjusted analyses, Planned Parenthood (AOR=9.49) and hospital-based (AOR=2.35) health centers had increased odds of offering IUDs (any type) and implants onsite, compared to Health Departments, as did Title X-funded (AOR=1.55) compared to non-Title X-funded health centers and centers serving a larger volume of family planning clients. Centers serving mostly rural areas compared to those serving urbans areas had lower odds (AOR 0.60) of offering IUD (any type) and implants.Conclusions: Variation in LARC access remains among publicly funded health centers. In particular, Health Departments and rural health centers have relatively low LARC provision.Implications: For more women to be offered a full range of contraceptive methods, additional efforts should be made to increase availability of LARC in publicly-funded health centers, such as addressing provider training gaps, improving referrals mechanisms, and other efforts to strengthen the health care system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The federal Title X Family Planning Program supports the delivery of family planning services and related preventive care to 4 million individuals annually in the United States. The implementation of the 2010 Affordable Care Act's (ACA's) Medicaid expansion and provisions expanding access to health insurance, which took effect in January 2014, resulted in higher rates of health insurance coverage in the U.S. population; the ACA's impact on individuals served by the Title X program has not yet been evaluated. Methods: Using administrative data we examined changes in health insurance coverage among Title X clinic patients during 2005–2015. Results: We found that the percentage of clients without health insurance decreased from 60% in 2005 to 48% in 2015, with the greatest annual decrease occurring between 2013 and 2014 (63% to 54%). Meanwhile, between 2005 and 2015, the percentage of clients with Medicaid or other public health insurance increased from 20% to 35% and the percentage of clients with private health insurance increased from 8% to 15%. Conclusions: Although clients attending Title X clinics remained uninsured at substantially higher rates compared with the national average, the increase in clients with health insurance coverage aligns with the implementation of ACA-related provisions to expand access to affordable health insurance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: This study assesses provider communication with adolescent and young women about birth control, emergency contraception and condoms during sexual and reproductive health visits.Study Design: Using data from sexually active 15-24-year-old women in the 2011-2015 National Survey of Family Growth, we examined provider communication about contraception and condoms at sexual and reproductive health services in the past year and assessed differences by demographics, sexual behavior and source of care.Results: Approximately two thirds of women received provider communication about condoms (65.0%) and birth control (64.0%-66.8%). Communication was higher among Title-X-funded clinic vs. private providers. Differences by age, race/ethnicity, mother's education, number of partners and condom use were also found.Conclusion: Most sexually active young women attending sexual and reproductive health visits received provider communication about condoms and birth control, but communication is not universal and varies by source of care, demographics and sexual behavior. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In March, the federal government sent Title X health providers a budget that will result in further slashes to programs that screen, test, trace, and treat people with STIs. STI rates are rising sharply for the sixth year in a row. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: This study aims to describe aspects of the scope and quality of family planning services provided by US publicly funded health centers before the release of relevant federal recommendations.Study Design: Using nationally representative survey data (N=1615), we describe four aspects of service delivery: family planning services provided, contraceptive methods provided onsite, written contraceptive counseling protocols and youth-friendly services. We created a count index for each issue and used multivariable ordered logistic regression to identify health center characteristics associated with scoring higher on each.Results: Half of the sample received Title X funding and about a third each were a community health center or health department clinic. The vast majority reported frequently providing contraceptive services (89%) and STD services (87%) for women in the past 3 months. Service provision to males was substantially lower except for STD screening. A total of 63% and 48% of health centers provided hormonal IUDs and implants onsite in the past 3 months, respectively. Forty percent of health centers included all five recommended contraceptive counseling practices in written protocols. Of youth-friendly services, active promotion of confidential services was among the most commonly reported (83%); offering weekend/evening hours was among the least (42%). In multivariable analyses, receiving Title X funding, having larger volumes of family planning clients and being a Planned Parenthood clinic were associated with higher scores on most indices.Conclusion: Many services were consistent with the recommendations for providing quality family planning services, but there was room for improvement across domains and health centers types.Implications Statement: As assessed in this paper, the scope and quality of these family planning services was relatively high, particularly among Planned Parenthood clinics and Title X-funded centers. However, results point to important areas for improvement. Future studies should assess change as implementation of recent family planning service recommendations continues. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In an effort to reduce lead paint exposure in old homes, the residential lead paint hazard disclosure rule (Title X) was enacted in 1996 in the USA, which requires house sellers to disclose known lead-based paint hazards to buyers. The policy is designed to induce individuals' improved maintenance behaviors through environmental information provisions. Minimizing the impact on housing prices is also the key component of the policy; a decline in the price of old homes because of the policy may lead to higher occupancy rates of the targeted low-income groups into lead paint risk homes. To explore the issue, this study examined whether the lead paint disclosure rule lowered values of old houses using the American Housing Survey data from 1993 to 2005 with the repeat sales method. The findings show the policy did not lower prices of old homes, as it intended. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The results of two recent studies suggest benefits for adolescents who receive contraceptive services through school-based health centers in Oregon. Contraceptive Technology Update asked lead author Emily R. Boniface, MPH, research associate in Oregon Health and Science University's department of obstetrics and gynecology, to answer questions about the new research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Human papillomavirus (HPV) is a sexually transmitted infection (STI) causing nearly all cases of cervical carcinoma and genital condyloma worldwide. While HPV vaccination rates are higher in Rhode Island compared to other states, still 27% of female adolescents are not fully vaccinated. The requirement for parental consent for vaccination administration poses a barrier to HPV vaccine uptake and hinders adolescent autonomy. This requirement lies in stark contrast to the goals of the Family Planning Title X Program, which provides all adolescents with access to contraception and STI prevention and treatment without parental consent. In this commentary, we propose that HPV vaccination should be available to all pre-teens and adolescents as part of teen reproductive and sexual healthcare, and thus be exempt from parental consent in a similar way to other reproductive and sexual health services such as STI testing and contraception. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]