Unfulfilled Requests for Postpartum Tubal Ligation at a Southern Tertiary Care Center.

BACKGROUND Nationally, multiple barriers lead only 50% of women who request postpartum tubal ligation to receive it prior to discharge. We aimed to identify characteristics associated with unfulfilled requests for postpartum tubal ligation at a tertiary medical center in the South.METHODS We conducted a retrospective chart review of all women delivering a live infant with a documented desire for postpartum sterilization between September 1, 2018, and November 30, 2018. The primary outcome was receipt of postpartum sterilization prior to discharge. We used chi-square and Mann Whitney U tests for descriptive analyses.RESULTS One thousand seventy-two women delivered a live infant at our institution during our sampling frame. One hundred twenty-four had a documented desire for postpartum sterilization (124/1072, 12%). Eighty-one women (81/124, 65%) received their postpartum sterilization and 43 women (43/124, 35%) did not. Women who delivered by cesarean were more likely to receive their postpartum sterilization (63/68; 93%) than if they delivered vaginally (18/56; 32%) (P < .001). Lack of valid Medicaid consent (P = .006) was associated with unfulfilled requests for postpartum sterilization following vaginal delivery while BMI > 40 (P = .158) approached significance.LIMITATIONS Our sample is small and from a single institution. Additionally, the specific reason for tubal ligation nonfulfillment was often not documented.CONCLUSIONS In this Southern institution, women delivering vaginally, those without a valid Medicaid consent form, and women with BMI > 40 were less likely to receive desired postpartum sterilization. Multipronged process changes are needed to fulfill patients' sterilization requests.

Pregnancy Medicaid Improvements in a Nonexpansion State After the Affordable Care Act.

One-half of women in the United States use Medicaid during pregnancy. Women living in states that did not expand Medicaid under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA) are at risk of losing coverage post partum. We analyzed Medicaid claims and vital statistics for the state of North Carolina for the period 2011 to 2017. North Carolina did not expand Medicaid but did alter Medicaid enrollment to meet ACA requirements. After implementation, enrollment in full Medicaid during pregnancy almost doubled, and enrollment in Medicaid for pregnant women decreased. Full Medicaid offers more comprehensive coverage and does not expire at 60 days post partum, allowing for access to crucial preventive health services including contraception and primary care.

Medical abortion reversal: science and politics meet.

Medical abortion is a safe, effective, and acceptable option for patients seeking an early nonsurgical abortion. In 2014, medical abortion accounted for nearly one third (31%) of all abortions performed in the United States. State-level attempts to restrict reproductive and sexual health have recently included bills that require physicians to inform women that a medical abortion is reversible. In this commentary, we will review the history, current evidence-based regimen, and regulation of medical abortion. We will then examine current proposed and existing abortion reversal legislation. The objective of this commentary is to ensure physicians are armed with rigorous evidence to inform patients, communities, and policy makers about the safety of medical abortion. Furthermore, given the current paucity of evidence for medical abortion reversal, physicians and policy makers can dispel bad science and misinformation and advocate against medical abortion reversal legislation.

Risk-Reducing Salpingectomy Versus Standard Tubal Sterilization: Lessons From Offering Women Options for Interval Sterilization.

OBJECTIVES: In women receiving sterilization, the removal of the entire fallopian tube, a procedure referred to as a risk-reducing salpingectomy (RRS), reduces subsequent ovarian cancer risk compared with standard tubal sterilization procedures. There are limited data on which surgical procedure women will choose when educated about the benefits of an RRS. Our objective was to study the proportion of women desiring sterilization that would choose an RRS. METHODS: This cohort study included women 30 years of age and older with a living biological child who requested laparoscopic sterilization at a tertiary academic hospital. Participants were given a decision aid and offered an RRS or a standard tubal sterilization procedure with titanium clips. The primary outcome was to determine the proportion of women who would choose an RRS. Other outcomes included estimated blood loss and operative time, which was compared between groups, along with complications. RESULTS: Fourteen of the 18 (78%) women who participated in our study chose RRS. Estimated blood loss and operating time were similar among women who underwent RRS and standard tubal sterilizations. There were no significant complications in either group. The study was ended early based on emerging data and a change in national practice patterns. CONCLUSIONS: Because of the elective nature of sterilization and the complexities of cancer risk reduction, a patient-centered approach is beneficial for sterilization counseling. Our results support offering RRS as an alternative to standard tubal sterilization.

The Impact of a 72-hour Waiting Period on Women's Access to Abortion Care at a Hospital-Based Clinic in North Carolina.

BACKGROUND In 2015, North Carolina became the 5th state to pass legislation requiring women to undergo state-mandated counseling 72 hours prior to abortion. Whether this legislation has changed the timing of abortion decision-making or receipt of care is not known.METHODS This is a cross-sectional study using anonymous survey data from women presenting for abortion at a hospital-based abortion clinic in North Carolina. Data were collected for 8 weeks immediately before and after implementation of the new waiting period.RESULTS 26/48 (54%) of eligible patients participated. More than half (56%) of women made their abortion decision relatively quickly (less than or equal to 3 days), but had a median time-to-care of almost a week.LIMITATIONS This small study is the 1st recent evaluation of abortion decision-making and receipt of care immediately before and after implementation of a 72-hour waiting period in a Southern state. Only women presenting for care at a single hospital-based clinic were surveyed. Data were self-reported.CONCLUSION In our clinical setting, most women decided to have an abortion quickly but still waited 10-15 days before receiving care. Extended waiting periods provide no medical benefits and the potential for harm and delay of care remains.

Dual Method Use among Postpartum HIV-Infected and HIV-Uninfected Malawian Women: A Prospective Cohort Study.

Dual method use, use of condoms plus another effective contraceptive method, is important in settings with high rates of unintended pregnancy and HIV infection. We evaluated the association of HIV status with dual method use in a cohort of postpartum women. Women completed baseline surveys in the postpartum ward and telephone surveys about contraceptive use 3, 6, and 12 months later. Nonpregnant women who completed at least one follow-up survey were eligible for this secondary analysis. Prevalence ratios were calculated using generalized estimating equations. Of the 511 sexually active women who completed a follow-up survey, condom use increased from 17.6% to 27.7% and nonbarrier contraceptive use increased from 73.8% to 87.6% from 3 to 12 months after delivery. Dual method use increased from 1.0% to 18.9% at 3 to 12 months after delivery. Dual method use was negligible and comparable between HIV-infected and HIV-uninfected women at 3 months but significantly higher among HIV-infected women at 6 months (APR = 3.9, 95% CI 2.2, 7.1) and 12 months (APR = 2.7, 95% CI 1.7, 4.3). Dual method use was low but largely driven by condom use among HIV-infected women at 6 and 12 months after delivery.

Management of Intrauterine Contraception in Early Pregnancy.

OBJECTIVES: Women with rare intrauterine contraception (IUC) failures are advised to have their IUC removed because of the risk of poor obstetric outcomes with a retained IUC. Specifics regarding IUC removal in early pregnancy including techniques for removal, rates of success, and immediate pregnancy outcomes following removal are not well described, however. The objective of this study was to identify women with an IUC in early pregnancy examined at a tertiary care center with the primary objective of describing IUC removal attempts, IUC removal successes, and pregnancy outcomes at 20 weeks following IUC removal. METHODS: Case series of women with concurrent IUC and early pregnancy who presented to a tertiary care ultrasound center by 12 weeks' gestation. RESULTS: A total of 3116 women had an early pregnancy ultrasound during the study period. Nineteen (19/3116, 0.61%) women underwent ultrasounds that identified a pregnancy before 12 weeks and an IUC in the uterus. A copper IUC was identified in 11 women (11/19, 58%) on their first ultrasound, and a levonogestrel IUC was identified in 5 women (5/19, 26%). Seventeen (17/19, 88%) women attempted to remove their IUC; 11 of 69 (69%) were successfully removed on the first attempt. Fourteen (14/19; 74%) women with an IUC examined by 12 weeks' gestation had an ongoing pregnancy at 20 weeks compared with 1782 (1782/2678, 67%; P = 0.209) women without an IUC. CONCLUSIONS: Pregnancy with IUC is rare. Among the 19 women who were found to have an in situ IUC and early pregnancy, most had a successful IUC removal and had an ongoing pregnancy at 20 weeks' gestation. In our case series, IUC removal in the first trimester was a straightforward procedure and likely successful.

Behavioral interventions for improving contraceptive use among women living with HIV.

BACKGROUND: Contraception services can help meet the family planning goals of women living with HIV as well as prevent mother-to-child transmission. Due to antiretroviral therapy, survival has improved for people living with HIV, and more HIV-positive women may desire to have a child or another child. Behavioral interventions, involving counseling or education, can help women choose and use an appropriate contraceptive method. OBJECTIVES: We systematically reviewed studies of behavioral interventions for HIV-positive women intended to inform contraceptive choice, encourage contraceptive use, or promote adherence to a contraceptive regimen. SEARCH METHODS: Until 2 August 2016, we searched MEDLINE, CENTRAL, Web of Science, POPLINE, ClinicalTrials.gov and ICTRP. For the initial review, we examined reference lists and unpublished project reports, and we contacted investigators in the field. SELECTION CRITERIA: Studies evaluated a behavioral intervention for improving contraceptive use for family planning (FP). The comparison could have been another behavioral intervention, usual care, or no intervention. We also considered studies that compared HIV-positive versus HIV-negative women. We included non-randomized studies as well as randomized controlled trials (RCTs).Primary outcomes were pregnancy and contraception use, e.g. uptake of a new method or improved use or continuation of current method. Secondary outcomes were knowledge of contraceptive effectiveness and attitude about contraception or a specific contraceptive method. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently extracted the data. One entered the data into RevMan and a second verified accuracy. We evaluated RCTs according to recommended principles. For non-randomized studies, we examined the quality of evidence using the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale. Given the need to control for confounding factors in non-randomized studies, we used adjusted estimates from the models when available. Where we did not have adjusted analyses, we calculated the odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). Due to varied study designs and interventions, we did not conduct meta-analysis. MAIN RESULTS: With three new reports, 10 studies from seven African countries met our eligibility criteria. Eight non-randomized studies included 8980 participants. Two cluster RCTs had 7136 participants across 36 sites. Three studies compared a special FP intervention versus usual care, three examined FP services integrated with HIV services, and four compared outcomes for HIV-positive and HIV-negative women.In four studies with high or moderate quality evidence, the special intervention was associated with contraceptive use or pregnancy. A study from Nigeria compared enhanced versus basic FP services. All sites had integrated FP and HIV services. Women with enhanced services were more likely to use a modern contraceptive method versus women with basic services (OR 2.48, 95% CI 1.31 to 4.72). A cluster RCT conducted in Kenya compared integrated FP and HIV services versus standard referral to a separate FP clinic. Women with integrated services were more likely to use more effective contraception (adjusted OR 1.81, 95% CI 1.24 to 2.63). Another cluster RCT compared an HIV prevention and FP intervention versus usual care in Kenya, Namibia, and Tanzania. Women at the special intervention sites in Tanzania were more likely to use highly effective contraception (adjusted OR 2.25, 95% CI 1.24 to 4.10). They were less likely to report unprotected sex (no condom use) at last intercourse (adjusted OR 0.23, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.40). Across the three countries, women at the special intervention sites were less likely to report any unprotected sex in the past two weeks (adjusted OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.99). A study in Côte d'Ivoire integrated HIV and FP services. HIV-positive women had a lower incidence of undesired pregnancy, but not overall pregnancy, compared with HIV-negative women (1.07 versus 2.38; reported P = 0.023). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The studies since 2009 focused on using modern or more effective methods of contraception. In those later reports, training on FP methods and counseling was more common, which may strengthen the intervention and improve the ability to meet clients' needs. The quality of evidence was moderate from the more recent studies and low for those from the 1990s.Comparative research involving contraceptive counseling for HIV-positive women is limited. The FP field needs better ways to help women choose an appropriate contraceptive and continue using that method. Improved counseling methods are especially needed for limited resource settings, such as clinics focusing on people living with HIV.

Effect of HIV status on fertility desire and knowledge of long-acting reversible contraception of postpartum Malawian women.

The objectives of this study were to describe the most recent pregnancy intentions and family planning preferences of HIV-infected and HIV-uninfected postpartum Malawian women, and to assess whether HIV status is associated with fertility desire and knowledge of intrauterine contraception (IUC) and the subdermal contraceptive implant. We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of the baseline characteristics of Malawian women enrolled in a prospective cohort study assessing postpartum contraceptive uptake and continuation. Women at a government hospital completed a baseline survey assessing reproductive history, family planning preferences, and knowledge of IUC and the implant. We used Pearson's chi-square tests to compare these parameters between HIV-infected and HIV-uninfected women. Modified Poisson regression was performed to assess the association between HIV status and fertility desire and knowledge about IUC and the implant. Of 634 postpartum women surveyed, HIV-infected women were more likely to report their most recent pregnancy was unintended (49% vs. 37%, p = 0.004). Nearly all women (97%) did not want a child in the next 2 years, but HIV-infected women were more likely to desire no more children (adjusted prevalence ratio [PR]: 1.59; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.33, 1.89). HIV-infected women were also less likely to know that IUC (adjusted PR: 0.72; 95% CI: 0.61, 0.84) and the implant (adjusted PR: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.75, 0.92) are safe during breast-feeding. Postpartum women strongly desire family spacing and many HIV-infected postpartum women desire no more children, suggesting an important role for these long-acting methods. Education about the efficacy and safety of IUC and the implant particularly during breast-feeding may facilitate postpartum use.

Immediate postpartum insertion of intrauterine device for contraception.

BACKGROUND: Women who want to start intrauterine contraception (IUC) during the postpartum period might benefit from IUC insertion immediately after delivery. Postplacental insertion greatly reduces the risk of subsequent pregnancy and eliminates the need for a return visit to start contraception. Without the option of immediate insertion, many women may never return for services or may adopt less effective contraception. OBJECTIVES: Our aim was to examine the outcomes of IUC insertion immediately after placenta delivery (within 10 minutes), especially when compared with insertion at other postpartum times. We focused on successful IUC placement (insertion), subsequent expulsion, and method use. SEARCH METHODS: We searched for trials until 1 April 2015. Sources included PubMed (MEDLINE), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), POPLINE, Web of Science, EMBASE, LILACS, ClinicalTrials.gov, and ICTRP. For the original review, the authors contacted investigators to identify other trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: We sought randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with at least one treatment arm that involved immediate IUC placement (i.e., within 10 minutes of placenta delivery). Comparison arms could have included early postpartum insertion (from 10 minutes postplacental to hospital discharge) or standard insertion (during a postpartum visit). Trials could also have compared different IUC methods or insertion techniques. Delivery may have been vaginal or cesarean. Primary outcomes were placement (insertion), subsequent expulsion, and method use at study assessment. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: For dichotomous outcomes, we used the Mantel-Haenszel odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). Earlier studies primarily reported results as life-table rates. We aggregated trials in a meta-analysis if they had similar interventions and outcome measures. A sensitivity analysis included studies with moderate or high quality evidence and sufficient outcome data. MAIN RESULTS: We included 15 trials. Seven studies reported from 2010 to 2014 were added to eight from the original 2001 review. Newer trials compared immediate postplacental insertion versus early (10 minutes to 48 hours) or standard insertion (during the postpartum visit). Of four with full reports, three were small trials. The other three studies had conference abstracts. The eight early trials examined immediate insertion of different devices or insertion techniques. Most studies were published in the 1980s, some with limited reporting.Our sensitivity analysis included trials with sufficient outcome data and moderate or high quality evidence. Four newer trials comparing insertion times met the inclusion criteria. Two studies used the levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system (LNG-IUS) after vaginal delivery. The other two trials placed IUC after cesarean section; one used the CuT 380A intrauterine device (IUD) and the other used the LNG-IUS.A pilot trial compared immediate insertion versus early or standard insertion. In groups comparing immediate versus early insertion (N = 30), all women had the LNG-IUS inserted. By six months, the groups had the same expulsion rate and did not differ significantly in IUC use.For immediate versus standard insertion, we conducted meta-analyses of four trials. Insertion rates did not differ significantly between study arms. However, the trial from Uganda showed insertion was more likely for the immediate group, although the estimate was imprecise. In the meta-analysis, expulsion by six months was more likely for the immediate group, but the confidence interval was wide (OR 4.89, 95% CI 1.47 to 16.32; participants = 210; studies = 4). IUC use at six months was more likely with immediate insertion than with standard insertion (OR 2.04, 95% CI 1.01 to 4.09; participants = 243; studies = 4). Study arms did not differ in use at 3 or 12 months in individual small trials. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Recent trials compared different insertion times after vaginal or cesarean delivery. Evidence was limited because studies with full reports generally had small sample sizes. Overall, the quality of evidence was moderate; abstracts and older studies had limited reporting. Ongoing trials will add to the evidence, although some are small. Trials of adequate power are needed to estimate expulsion rates and side effects.The benefit of effective contraception immediately after delivery may outweigh the disadvantage of increased risk for expulsion. Frequent prenatal visits during the third trimester provide the opportunity to discuss effective contraceptive methods and desired timing for initiation. Clinical follow-up can help detect early expulsion, as can educating women about expulsion signs and symptoms.

Reasons for Intrauterine Device Use, Discontinuation and Non-Use in Malawi: A Qualitative Study of Women and their Partners.

The copper intrauterine device (IUD) is a safe, long-acting, and effective method of contraception that is under-utilized in many countries, including Malawi. A unique cohort of women who had enrolled in a trial of postpartum IUD use one year earlier gave insights into reasons for using, discontinuing, or not using the IUD. We conducted in-depth interviews with 18 women one year after they participated in a pilot study of a randomized controlled trial of postpartum IUD insertion, and 10 of their male partners. Women and their partners expressed a strong desire for family planning, and perceived numerous benefits of the IUD. However, fear of the IUD was common among successful users and non-users alike. This fear arose from rumours from friends and neighbors who were non-users. How women and their partners responded to this fear affected IUD adoption and continuation. Key themes included (1) Trust in information received from health care providers versus rumours from community members; (2) Partner involvement in IUD decision-making; and (3) Experience with side effects from short-term hormonal contraceptive methods. Broad community education about the IUD's benefits and safety, and proactive counseling to address couples' specific fears, may be needed to increase uptake of the method.

Single-Visit Long-Acting Reversible Contraception Initiation Among Adolescents Before and During COVID-19.

PURPOSE: Single-visit long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) is cost-effective and convenient. Our objective was to compare incidence of single-visit LARC placement and associated factors during the year before the COVID-19 pandemic (March 15, 2020) and the first year of the pandemic. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study analyzed electronic health records from a large healthcare system. Eligible adolescents were aged 10-19 years and received outpatient LARC from March 15, 2019 to March 14, 2021. Logistic regression models determined the relationship of patient and provider characteristics on single-visit LARC before and during COVID-19. RESULTS: One thousand six adolescents initiated LARC during the study period. Fewer adolescents received single-visit LARC during COVID-19 (289/506, 57.1%) compared to before (315/500, 63.0%), although changes in odds of single-visit LARC were not statistically significant. Concordance between county of patient residence and the location of the LARC placement facility was associated with single-visit LARC before (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 2.75) and during (aOR = 1.74) the pandemic (both p < .05). During the pandemic, a few factors were associated with reduced odds of single-visit LARC: (1) public insurance (aOR = 0.49, p < .01), (2) nonobstetricians/nongynecologists providers (pediatrics [aOR = 0.35, p < .01], family medicine [aOR = 0.53, p < .01], or internal medicine [aOR = 0.14, p < .05]), and (3) advanced practice practitioners (aOR = 0.49, p < .01). DISCUSSION: Incidence of single-visit LARC was similar before and during the pandemic. Certain factors were associated with lower odds of single-visit LARC insertion, suggesting differential access during the pandemic for subgroups of adolescents. Our findings may guide policy and programmatic interventions to improve access to single-visit LARC for all adolescent populations.

Potential demand for and access to medication abortion among North Carolina college students.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate demand for medication abortion (MAB) among North Carolina (NC) college students and describe access to nearest clinics offering MAB to each campus. METHODS: We calculated demand using 2019-2020 campus demographics and NC abortion statistics. We used a mystery client technique to gather MAB cost and appointment wait times at the closest clinics and calculated travel distances and times. RESULTS: We estimated that 2,517 NC students seek MAB annually. Twenty-one clinics were closest to NC's 111 colleges and universities, including five in neighboring states. Mean cost was $450, with an average wait time of six days to appointment. The average round-trip travel distance was 58 miles and time to the nearest clinic was 84 min by car. CONCLUSIONS: Many NC college students likely obtain MAB every year and face high costs, long wait times and distances to care, which has likely worsened after the overturning of Roe v. Wade.

Behavioral interventions for improving contraceptive use among women living with HIV.

BACKGROUND: Contraception services can help meet the family planning goals of women living with HIV as well as prevent mother-to-child transmission. Due to the increased availability of antiretroviral therapy, survival has improved for people living with HIV, and more HIV-positive women may desire to have a child or another child. This review examines behavioral interventions to improve contraceptive use, for family planning, among women who are HIV-positive. OBJECTIVES: We systematically reviewed studies that examined behavioral interventions for HIV-positive women that were intended to inform contraceptive choice, encourage contraceptive use, or promote adherence to a contraceptive regimen. SEARCH METHODS: Through October 2012, we searched MEDLINE, CENTRAL, POPLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, ClinicalTrials.gov and ICTRP. For other relevant papers, we examined reference lists and unpublished project reports, and contacted investigators in the field. SELECTION CRITERIA: Studies evaluated a behavioral intervention for improving contraceptive use for contraception. The comparison could be another behavioral intervention, usual care, or no intervention. We also considered studies that compared HIV-positive women versus HIV-negative women. We included nonrandomized (observational) studies as well as randomized trials.Primary outcomes were pregnancy and contraception use, e.g., uptake of a new method, improved use or continuation of current method. Secondary outcomes were knowledge of contraceptive effectiveness and attitude about contraception in general or about a specific contraceptive method. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently extracted the data. One author entered the data into RevMan and a second verified accuracy. We examined the quality of evidence using the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale.Given the need to control for confounding factors in observational studies, we used adjusted estimates from the models when available. Where we did not have adjusted analyses, we calculated the odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). Due to varied study designs, we did not conduct meta-analysis. MAIN RESULTS: The seven studies meeting our inclusion criteria had a total of 8882 women. All were conducted in Africa. Three studies compared a special intervention versus standard services. In one, the special intervention site showed greater use of non-condom contraceptives per visit (OR 6.40; 95% CI 5.37 to 7.62) and reported a lower pregnancy incidence. In another study, use of modern contraceptives was more likely for women at sites with enhanced versus basic integrated services (OR 2.48; 95% CI 1.31 to 4.72), but the groups did not differ significantly in change from baseline. In the third study, new use of modern contraceptives, excluding condoms, was less likely for women with integrated services versus those with routine care (OR 0.56; 95% CI 0.42 to 0.75), but new use of condoms was more likely (OR 1.73; 95% CI 1.52 to 1.98).Four older studies compared HIV-positive women versus HIV-negative women. None showed any significant difference between the HIV-status groups in use of modern contraceptives. Two did not provide an intervention for the HIV-negative women. In the larger of the two studies, HIV-positive women were less likely to become pregnant (OR 0.55; 95% CI 0.43 to 0.69). HIV-positive women were more likely to discontinue their hormonal contraceptive (OR 2.52; 95% CI 1.53 to 4.14) but more likely to use condoms (OR 2.82; 95% CI 2.18 to 3.65) and spermicide (OR 2.36; 95% CI 1.69 to 3.30). Two studies provided the intervention to both HIV-status groups. One included many of the women from the study just mentioned, and also showed fewer pregnancies for HIV-positive women (OR 0.39; 95% CI 0.23 to 0.68). In the other study, the HIV-status groups were not significantly different for pregnancy or consistent condom use. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Comparative research on contraceptive counseling for HIV-positive women has been limited. We found little innovation in the behavioral interventions. Our ability to make statements about overall results is hampered by varied study designs, interventions, and outcome assessments. The quality of evidence was moderate. Since some of these studies were conducted, improvements in HIV treatment have influenced the fertility intentions of HIV-positive people.The family planning field needs better ways to help women choose an appropriate contraceptive and continue using that chosen method. Women with HIV may have special concerns regarding family planning. Research could focus on assessing the woman's needs and training providers to address those issues rather than delivering standardized information.

Immediate postpartum versus 6-week postpartum intrauterine device insertion: a feasibility study of a randomized controlled trial.

This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility of conducting a randomized controlled trial of postpartum intrauterine device insertion and to demonstrate that the postpartum intrauterine device is acceptable to women. Women attending prenatal care at a maternity hospital in Lilongwe, Malawi were recruited into a trial comparing immediate (10 minutes to 48 hours) to 6 week postpartum insertion. Feasibility of recruiting and consenting 140 women and randomizing 70% of them was evaluated. Satisfaction with the intrauterine device was also assessed. One hundred fifteen women consented and 49 (61%) were randomized. Twenty-six women were assigned to immediate insertion, and 23 to insertion at 6 weeks postpartum. Thirty (24%) women received the device as part of the study protocol, and 28 (93%) had the device in place at 12 weeks postpartum. The intrauterine device is acceptable to some postpartum women in Malawi, but conducting a randomized clinical trial may not be feasible.

Single-visit insertion of long-acting reversible contraception in a single health system.

OBJECTIVE: To identify patient and practice characteristics associated with single-visit placement of long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) across the University of North Carolina Health system. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a retrospective observational study using existing electronic health records. We abstracted data from charts of individuals ages 15-50 years who received a LARC device between March 15, 2019, and March 14, 2021. Our primary outcome was whether a patient received LARC at one, or after multiple, outpatient visits. We used descriptive statistics to examine patient, clinician, and practice characteristics. We used bivariate analysis and generalized estimating equation to examine relationships between characteristics and single-visit LARC receipt. RESULTS: Most of the 4599 individuals received care at obstetrics and gynecology clinics (3411/4599; 74%), and received their LARC device in a single visit (3163/4599; 69%). More intrauterine devices (3151) were placed than implants (1448). The adjusted odds of receiving a LARC in a single visit was highest for those who self-paid (aOR (adjusted odds ratio) 1.83, 1.19-2.82) and those who received an implant (aOR 1.25, 1.07-1.46). Patients seen by advanced practice practitioners (aOR 0.67, 0.56-0.80) or by an internal medicine specialty clinician (aOR 0.13, 0.00-0.35) had lower odds of receiving a single-visit LARC compared to those seen by a specialist obstetrician-gynecologist physician. CONCLUSION: Most single-visit LARC placements were performed by clinicians in obstetrician-gynecologist specialty practices. IMPLICATIONS: Among individuals seeking long-acting reversible contraceptives from clinics in a single health system in North Carolina, most received a device at a single visit and most single-visit insertions were done by an obstetrician-gynecologist.

Frequency and characteristics associated with opportunistic salpingectomy at cesarean delivery: A retrospective chart review.

OBJECTIVES: To identify the frequency and characteristics associated with total salpingectomy (TS) versus occlusion or partial salpingectomy (PS) at the time of cesarean delivery. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a retrospective chart review of cesarean deliveries with a concurrent permanent contraception procedure, from July 1, 2014 to June 30, 2019 at 2 hospitals (community hospital and tertiary care academic center) within a single healthcare system. We assessed the proportion of TS versus PS at cesarean, and secondarily compared operative times between the 2 procedures. RESULTS: We identified 2110 procedures during the 5-year period. Surgeons performed TS in 302 (14%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 13%-16%) cases, and the annual rate varied from 14% to 18% over the study period (p = 0.14). Factors associated with increased likelihood of TS rather than PS included public insurance/self-pay (adjusted odds ratio, aOR 2.8, 95% CI 2.0-4.1), delivery at the community hospital (aOR 4.8, 95% CI 3.0-7.7), parity of 5 or more (aOR 2.2, 95% CI 1.1-4.4), and presence of an obstetrician/gynecologist for cesarean delivery (aOR 2.9, 95% CI 1.6-5.4). The total operative time for TS and PS differed at the academic center (90 vs 68 minutes, p < 0.001) but not at the community hospital (55 vs 54 minutes, p = 0.5). CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights provider and institutional characteristics associated with TS compared to PS at the time of cesarean delivery, which may inform future programs aimed at increasing utilization of TS at cesarean delivery. IMPLICATIONS: Access to TS at the time of cesarean delivery may provide pregnant women with a very effective permanent contraception method at a convenient time of concurrent cesarean. This study identifies patient factors that may influence access to TS as part of obstetrical care.

Comparing Website Identification for Crisis Pregnancy Centers and Abortion Clinics.

BACKGROUND: Crisis pregnancy centers (CPCs) seeking to dissuade women from abortion often appear in Internet searches for abortion clinics. We aimed to assess whether women can use screenshots from real websites to differentiate between CPCs and abortion clinics. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional, nationally representative online study of English- and Spanish-speaking women aged 18-49 years in the United States. We presented participants with screenshots from five CPCs and five abortion clinic websites and asked if they thought an abortion could be obtained at that center. We scored correct answers based on clinic type. Outcomes included ability to correctly identify CPCs and abortion clinics as well as risk factors for misidentification. The survey also included five questions about common abortion myths and a validated health literacy assessment. RESULTS: We contacted 2,223 women, of whom 1,057 (48%) completed the survey and 1,044 (47%) were included in the analysis. The median score for correctly identifying CPCs as facilities not performing abortion was 2 out of 5 (Q1: 0, Q3: 4). The median score for correctly identifying abortion clinics as facilities performing abortion was 5 out of 5 (Q1: 3, Q3: 5). Those less likely to endorse abortion myths had higher odds of correctly identifying CPCs (adjusted odds ratio, 2.43; 95% confidence interval, 1.78-3.32). A low health literacy score was associated with decreased odds of correct identification of CPCs (adjusted odds ratio, 0.39; 95% confidence interval, 0.25-0.59). CONCLUSIONS: Websites of CPCs were more difficult for women to correctly identify than those of abortion clinics. Women with limited knowledge about abortion and low health literacy may be particularly susceptible to misidentification of CPC websites.

Women's knowledge of their state's abortion regulations. A national survey.

OBJECTIVES: States vary significantly in their regulation of abortion. Misinformation about abortion is pervasive and propagated by state-mandated scripts that contain abortion myths. We sought to investigate women's knowledge of abortion laws in their state. Our secondary objective was to describe women's ability to discern myths about abortion from facts about abortion. STUDY DESIGN: This was a cross-sectional study of English- and Spanish-speaking women aged 18-49 in the United States. We enrolled members of the GfK KnowledgePanel, a probability-based, nationally-representative online sample. Our primary outcome was the proportion of correct answers to 12 questions about laws regulating abortion in a respondent's state. We asked five questions about common abortion myths. We used descriptive statistics to characterize performance on these measures and bivariate and multivariate modeling to identify risk factors for poor knowledge of state abortion laws. RESULTS: Of 2223 women contacted, 1057 (48%) completed the survey. The mean proportion of correct answers to 12 law questions was 18% (95% CI 17-20%). For three of five assessed myths, women endorsed myths about abortion over facts. Those who believe abortion should be illegal (aOR 2.18, CI 1.40-3.37), and those living in states with neutral or hostile state policies toward abortion (neutral aOR 1.99, CI 1.34-2.97; hostile aOR 1.6, CI 1.07-2.36) were at increased odds of poor law knowledge. CONCLUSIONS: Women had low levels of knowledge about state abortion laws and commonly endorse abortion myths. Women's knowledge of their state's abortion laws was associated with personal views about abortion and their state policy environment. IMPLICATIONS: Supporters of reproductive rights can use these results to show policy makers that their constituents are unlikely to know about laws being passed that may profoundly affect them. These findings underscore the potential benefit in correcting widely-held, medically-inaccurate beliefs about abortion so opinions about laws can be based on fact.