The Role of Family Support in Moderating Mental Health Outcomes for LGBTQ+ Youth in Primary Care.

Importance: Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and/or questioning (LGBTQ+) youth face worse mental health outcomes than non-LGBTQ+ peers. Family support may mitigate this, but sparse evidence demonstrates this in clinical settings. Objectives: To compare depression and suicide risk between LGBTQ+ and non-LGBTQ+ youth in primary care settings and to investigate whether family support mitigates these negative mental health outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study uses data from well care visits completed by adolescents aged 13 to 19 years from February 2022 through May 2023, including the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 Modified for Teens (PHQ-9-M) and the Adolescent Health Questionnaire (AHQ; an electronic screener assessing identity, behaviors, and guardian support), at 32 urban or suburban care clinics in Pennsylvania and New Jersey. Exposures: The primary exposure was self-reported LGBTQ+ status. Family support moderators included parental discussion of adolescent strengths and listening to feelings. Race and ethnicity (determined via parent or guardian report at visit check-in), sex, payer, language, age, and geography were covariates. Main Outcomes and Measures: PHQ-9-M-derived mental health outcomes, including total score, recent suicidal ideation, and past suicide attempt. Results: The sample included 60 626 adolescents; among them, 9936 (16.4%) were LGBTQ+, 15 387 (25.5%) were Black, and 30 296 (50.0%) were assigned female sex at birth. LGBTQ+ youth, compared with non-LGBTQ+ youth, had significantly higher median (IQR) PHQ-9-M scores (5 [2-9] vs 1 [0-3]; P < .001) and prevalence of suicidal ideation (1568 [15.8%] vs 1723 [3.4%]; P < .001). Fewer LGBTQ+ youth endorsed parental support than non-LGBTQ+ youth (discussion of strengths, 8535 [85.9%] vs 47 003 [92.7%]; P < .001; and listening to feelings, 7930 [79.8%] vs 47 177 [93.1%]; P < .001). In linear regression adjusted for demographic characteristics and parental discussion of strengths, LGBTQ+ status was associated with a higher PHQ-9-M score (mean difference, 3.3 points; 95% CI, 3.2-3.3 points). In logistic regression, LGBTQ+ youth had increased adjusted odds of suicidal ideation (adjusted odds ratio, 4.3; 95% CI, 4.0-4.7) and prior suicide attempt (adjusted odds ratio, 4.4; 95% CI, 4.0-4.7). Parental support significantly moderated the association of LGBTQ+ status with PHQ-9-M score and suicidal ideation, with greater protection against these outcomes for LGBTQ+ vs non-LGBTQ+ youth. Conclusions and Relevance: Compared with non-LGBTQ+ youth, LGBTQ+ youth at primary care visits had more depressive symptoms and higher odds of suicidal ideation and prior suicide attempt. Youth-reported parental support was protective against these outcomes, suggesting potential benefits of family support-focused interventions to mitigate mental health inequities for LGBTQ+ youth.

The impact on postpartum care by telehealth: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, our institution turned to telehealth as the primary method of postpartum care delivery. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to determine the impact of telehealth on completion of postpartum care goals. STUDY DESIGN: In a single-center retrospective cohort study, we compared a 14-week period, March to June 2019, before implementation of telehealth, with the same calendar months after implementation during 2020. Patients with a postpartum visit scheduled at our institution during the study period were included. To demonstrate a 10% difference in attendance to the postpartum visit in the postimplementation compared with the preimplementation group, a power analysis calculation resulted in a requirement of at least 356 subjects per group. Our primary outcome was attendance to the postpartum visit. Secondary outcomes included completion of postpartum depression screening, contraception selection, breastfeeding status at postpartum visit, completion of 2-hour glucose tolerance test postpartum for those with gestational diabetes mellitus, and cardiology follow-up when recommended. Multivariable logistic regression with backward elimination was used to control for confounders. RESULTS: Of the 1579 patients meeting inclusion criteria, 780 were in the preimplementation group and 799 in the postimplementation group. Subjects in the postimplementation group were at 90% increased odds of attending a postpartum visit compared with those in the preimplementation group, even when controlling for race, prenatal care provider, parity, gestational age at delivery, and insurance status (82.9% vs 72.4%; P<.001; adjusted odds ratio, 1.90; 95% confidence interval, 1.47-2.46). Patients in the postimplementation group were also more likely to be screened for postpartum depression (86.3% vs 65.1%; P<.001). Although subjects in both groups were equally likely to choose contraception, those in the postimplementation group were less likely to select long-acting reversible contraception or permanent sterilization (26.2% vs 33.2%; P=.03). There was no significant difference in breastfeeding status, postpartum 2-hour glucose tolerance test completion, or cardiology follow-up between groups. CONCLUSION: Availability of telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic is associated with increased postpartum visit attendance and postpartum depression screening. However, telehealth was also associated with a decrease in use of long-acting reversible contraception or permanent sterilization.