Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 6 de 6
Filtrar
2.
Clin Obstet Gynecol ; 57(4): 731-40, 2014 Dec.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25314085

RESUMO

Sterilization, male and female combined, is the most common use of contraception in the United States. Despite the lower risk, higher cost-efficacy, and high efficacy of vasectomy compared with female sterilization, more US women rely on female sterilization than male sterilization. Reasons for low use of vasectomy include lack of knowledge and misconceptions about the procedure, lack of access, provider bias, and patient preferences. This article will provide a basic overview of male and female sterilization, an exploration of vasectomy barriers, and ways obstetrician-gynecologists can increase vasectomy uptake including regular recommendation of vasectomy to patients in long-term committed relationships considering sterilization.


Assuntos
Anticoncepção/métodos , Complicações Pós-Operatórias , Esterilização Reprodutiva/métodos , Esterilização Tubária/métodos , Vasectomia/métodos , Anticoncepção/economia , Serviços de Planejamento Familiar , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Esterilização Reprodutiva/efeitos adversos , Esterilização Reprodutiva/economia , Esterilização Tubária/efeitos adversos , Esterilização Tubária/economia , Estados Unidos , Vasectomia/efeitos adversos , Vasectomia/economia
3.
Contraception ; 110: 56-60, 2022 06.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35263650

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: We assessed the proportion of medication versus suction aspiration abortions before and after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in a health system that did not limit access to abortion. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted an interrupted time series analysis among patients having an abortion at 10 weeks gestation or less at Planned Parenthood health centers in San Diego, Imperial, and Riverside Counties in California. Centers required in-person follow up for medication abortion throughout the pandemic. We compared the nine months prior to the pandemic (June 2019 to February 2020) to the first nine months of the pandemic (April 2020 to December 2020), with March 2020 as a washout period. RESULTS: There was an average monthly increase of 0.78% in the proportion of medication abortions from June 2019 to February 2020 (p = 0.01, pre-pandemic trend). Immediately following the start of the pandemic, there was an estimated increase in the proportion of medication abortions of 2.58% (p = 0.23, post-level change). However, the monthly pre-pandemic trend towards medication abortions reversed by 1.07% after the start of the pandemic (p = 0.02, post-trend change), for an average monthly decrease in the proportion of medication abortions of 0.29% from April to December 2020 (p = 0.37, pandemic trend). CONCLUSIONS: The trend towards medication abortions that was present before the COVID-19 pandemic reversed after an initial increase in medication abortions at the start of the pandemic. IMPLICATIONS: Both types of abortion should remain available during public health emergencies. Further research is needed to understand how the pandemic affected abortion methods in areas with limited access and in health centers that did not require two in-person appointments for medication abortions.


Assuntos
Aborto Induzido , Aborto Espontâneo , COVID-19 , Aborto Legal , California/epidemiologia , Feminino , Idade Gestacional , Humanos , Pandemias , Gravidez
4.
Obstet Gynecol ; 129(1): 200-201, 2017 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27926657
5.
Obstet Gynecol ; 128(1): 203-4, 2016 07.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27275814
6.
Acad Emerg Med ; 16(4): 301-8, 2009 Apr.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-19210488

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: The authors investigated whether models using time series methods can generate accurate short-term forecasts of emergency department (ED) bed occupancy, using traditional historical averages models as comparison. METHODS: From July 2005 through June 2006, retrospective hourly ED bed occupancy values were collected from three tertiary care hospitals. Three models of ED bed occupancy were developed for each site: 1) hourly historical average, 2) seasonal autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA), and 3) sinusoidal with an autoregression (AR)-structured error term. Goodness of fits were compared using log likelihood and Akaike's Information Criterion (AIC). The accuracies of 4- and 12-hour forecasts were evaluated by comparing model forecasts to actual observed bed occupancy with root mean square (RMS) error. Sensitivity of prediction errors to model training time was evaluated, as well. RESULTS: The seasonal ARIMA outperformed the historical average in complexity adjusted goodness of fit (AIC). Both AR-based models had significantly better forecast accuracy for the 4- and the 12-hour forecasts of ED bed occupancy (analysis of variance [ANOVA] p < 0.01), compared to the historical average. The AR-based models did not differ significantly from each other in their performance. Model prediction errors did not show appreciable sensitivity to model training times greater than 7 days. CONCLUSIONS: Both a sinusoidal model with AR-structured error term and a seasonal ARIMA model were found to robustly forecast ED bed occupancy 4 and 12 hours in advance at three different EDs, without needing data input beyond bed occupancy in the preceding hours.


Assuntos
Ocupação de Leitos/estatística & dados numéricos , Ocupação de Leitos/tendências , Aglomeração , Serviço Hospitalar de Emergência/estatística & dados numéricos , Previsões , Necessidades e Demandas de Serviços de Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Necessidades e Demandas de Serviços de Saúde/tendências , Humanos , Modelos Organizacionais , Análise de Regressão , Estudos Retrospectivos , Estações do Ano , Fatores de Tempo
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA