Primary Care and Pre-exposure Prophylaxis Services in Publicly Funded Family Planning Clinics in the Southern United States.

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.

Affordable but Inaccessible? Contraception Deserts in the US States.

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.

Examining Temporal Trends in Documentation of Pregnancy Intentions in Family Planning Health Centers Using Electronic Health Records.

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.

Changes in contraceptive method mix following the Colorado Family Planning Initiative.

OBJECTIVES: 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. STUDY DESIGN: 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. RESULTS: 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. CONCLUSIONS: 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. IMPLICATIONS: 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.

Early national trends in non-abortion reproductive care access after Roe.

Background: Roe was overturned in 2022. No peer-reviewed evidence exists for the indirect spillover effects of overturning Roe on non-abortion reproductive care access for diverse patient populations. Methods: National data were from 2013-2023 HHS Title X Directory, 2013-2020 CDC Artificial Reproductive Technologies (ART) Surveillance and 2021-2023 manual collection, and Guttmacher Institute. Outcome measures included numbers of ART clinics and Title X entities. Title X entities are those that receive federal funds to establish and operate voluntary family planning projects, especially for low-income patients. We reported pre-and post-Roe changes, associations between changes in measures and abortions, and characteristics of changed measures by region and political geography. Results: Post-Roe America witnessed national declines of 1.03% in ART clinics and 18.34% in Title X entities, and average state decreases of 0.08 ART clinics (p < 0.05) and 18 Title X entities (p < 0.001). State-level ART clinic closures and abortion reductions had little association except for Texas, Oklahoma, Arizona, New York, and California. Plummets in Title X entities and abortions were positively associated: Reducing 100 abortions was associated with defunding two Title X entities (p < 0.05). The South experienced the largest losses of both, while 83.39% of lost Title X entities were in states that voted Republican in the 2020 presidential election, disproportionate to the 49.02% of states that voted Republican and the 42.52% of US population residing in these states. Conclusion: We provide one of the first few evidence of spillover impacts of overturning Roe on non-abortion care access for diverse populations: low-income men and women, single parents by choice, and biologically and socially infertile patients. Early evidence warns of worsening challenges of inequities and calls for immediate policy actions.

The impact of policy changes from the perspective of providers of family planning care in the US: results from a qualitative study.

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.

Expanding Access to Contraception: Identifying Accessibility Gaps Across Hawai'i Communities.

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.

Association of Title X clinic status with receipt of person-centered contraceptive counseling: A population-based study.

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.

An evaluation of the Be Your Own Baby public awareness campaign.

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.

Contraceptive provision in Oregon school-based health centers: Method type trends and the role of Title X.

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.

"We have to respect that option": The abortion aversion complex in safety-net healthcare organizations.

In July 2019, the Trump administration began implementing its domestic gag rule to ban discussion of abortion in pregnancy options counseling and ensure physical separation of contraceptive and abortion services at clinical sites funded by the federal government's Title X Family Planning program. In this paper, we examine how organizational policy utilization correlated with organization-level protocols for discussing abortion in options counseling interactions while the domestic gag rule policy was under legal contest. From April 2018 to July 2019, we conducted in-depth interviews with 50 administrators in charge of setting clinical protocols regarding options counseling after a positive pregnancy test at 20 Title X-covered and 14 non-Title X-covered safety-net healthcare organizations in Ohio. We found that organizational characteristics and Title X policy utilization did not explain the heterogeneity in approaches to abortion referral that administrators reported. Administrators from 2 of 20 organizations covered by Title X policy requirements pre-emptively restricted discussion of abortion in their facilities in advance of policy enactment. Meanwhile, administrators from 10 of 14 non-Title X-covered organizations did not restrict discussion of abortion. Our analysis demonstrates how safety-net healthcare organizations' response to federal policy is shaped by administrators' institutional entrepreneurship within the abortion aversion complex: a pattern of policy miscomprehension and endorsed abortion stigma that facilitates the structural stigmatization of abortion within safety-net healthcare organizations. We conclude that current efforts to reverse the domestic gag rule will fail unless local abortion aversion complexes are targeted with intervention.

Accessibility of federally funded family planning services in South Carolina and Alabama.

This study operationalized the five dimensions of health care access in the context of contraceptive service provision and used this framework to examine access to contraceptive care at health department (HD) (Title X funded) and federally qualified health center (FQHC) (primarily non-Title X funded) clinics in South Carolina and Alabama. A cross-sectional survey was conducted in 2017/18 that assessed clinic-level characteristics, policies, and practices related to contraceptive provision. Provision of different contraceptive methods was examined between clinic types. Survey items were mapped to the dimensions of access and internal consistency for each scale was tested with Cronbach's alpha. Scores of access were developed and differences by clinic type were evaluated with an independent t-test. The overall response rate was 68.3% and the sample included 235 clinics. HDs (96.9%) were significantly more likely to provide IUDs and/or Impants on-site than FQHCs (37.4%) (P < 0.0001). Scales with the highest consistency were Availability: Clinical Policy (24 items) (alpha = 0.892) and Acceptability (43 items) (alpha = 0.834). HDs had higher access scores than FQHCs for the Availability: Clinical Policy scale (0.58, 95% CL 0.55, 0.61) vs (0.29, 95% CL 0.25, 0.33) and Affordability: Administrative Policy scale (0.86, 95% CL 0.83, 0.90) vs (0.47, 95% CL 0.41, 0.53). FQHCs had higher access scores than HDs for Affordability: Insurance Policy (0.78, 95% CL 0.72, 0.84) vs (0.56, 95% CL 0.53, 0.59). These findings highlight strengths and gaps in contraceptive care access. Future studies must examine the impact of each dimension of access on clinic-level contraceptive utilization.

A Mixed-Methods Assessment of Health Care Providers' Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices Around Fertility Awareness-Based Methods in Title X Clinics in the United States.

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.

Highly-Effective Contraception Use More Likely Among Native Hawaiian Women than Non-Native Hawaiian Women at Title X Clinics in Hawai'i.

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.

Counseling and referrals for women with unplanned pregnancies at publicly funded family planning organizations in Texas.

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.

Access to contraception in local health departments, four Midwest states, 2017-2018.

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.

Patterns and trends in contraceptive use among women attending Title X clinics and a national sample of low-income women.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the types of contraception used by women attending Title X-funded clinics and a comparable group of low-income reproductive-age women at risk of unintended pregnancy. STUDY DESIGN: We estimated the percentage of reproductive aged (15-44 years) women using contraception, by method type and level of effectiveness in preventing pregnancy (i.e., most, moderately, and less effective), using Title X Family Planning Annual Report (2006-2016) and National Survey of Family Growth (2006-2015) data. We divided most effective methods into permanent (female and male sterilization) and reversible (long-acting reversible contraceptives [LARCs]) methods. RESULTS: Among Title X clients during 2006-2016, use of LARCs increased (3-14%); use of moderately effective methods decreased (64-54%); and use of sterilization (~ 2%), less effective methods (21-20%), and no method (8-7%) was unchanged. These same trends in contraceptive use were observed in a comparable group of women nationally during 2006-2015, during which LARC use increased (5-19%, p < .001); moderately effective method use decreased (60-48%, p < .001); and use of sterilization (~5%), less effective methods (19%), and no method (11-10%) was unchanged. CONCLUSIONS: The contraceptive method mix among Title X clients differs from that of low-income women at risk of unintended pregnancy nationally, but general patterns and trends are similar in the two populations. Research is needed to understand whether method use patterns among low-income women reflect their preferences, access, or the conditions of the supply environment. IMPLICATIONS: This study contributes to our understanding of patterns and trends in contraceptive use among two groups of reproductive-age women - Title X clients and low-income women nationally who are at risk of unintended pregnancy. The findings highlight areas for further research.

Provider communication with adolescent and young females during sexual and reproductive health visits: findings from the 2011-2015 National Survey of Family Growth.

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.

Eliminating parental consent for adolescents receiving human papillomavirus vaccination.

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. [Full article available at http://rimed.org/rimedicaljournal-2018-09.asp].

Family Planning Confidential: A Qualitative Research Study on the Implications of the Affordable Care Act.

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.