Postpartum Family Planning in Pediatrics: A Survey of Parental Contraceptive Needs and Health Services Preferences.

OBJECTIVE: Infant well-child visits are increasingly being explored as opportunities to address parental postpartum health needs, including those related to reproductive health. To inform potential pediatric clinic-based interventions, this study assessed postpartum contraceptive needs and health services preferences. METHODS: We surveyed postpartum individuals attending 2 to 6-month well-child visits at three Northern California pediatric clinics (2019-20). We examined unmet contraceptive needs; the acceptability of contraceptive education, counseling, and provision at well-child visits; and sociodemographic and clinical correlates. We conducted univariate and multivariable regression modeling to assess associations between sociodemographic and clinical variables, the status of contraceptive needs, and acceptability measures. RESULTS: Study participants (n = 263) were diverse in terms of race and ethnicity (13% Asian, 9% Black, 37% Latinx, 12% Multi-racial or Other, 29% White), and socioeconomic status. Overall, 25% had unmet contraceptive needs. Unmet need was more common among participants who had delivered more recently, were multiparous, or reported ≥ 1 barrier to obtaining contraception; postpartum visit attendance, education, race, and ethnicity were not associated with unmet need. Most participants deemed the following acceptable in the pediatric clinic: receiving contraceptive information (85%), discussing contraception (86%), and obtaining a contraceptive method (81%). Acceptability of these services was greater among participants with unmet contraceptive needs, better self-rated health, and private insurance (all P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: A quarter of participants had unmet contraceptive needs beyond the early postpartum period. Most considered the pediatric clinic an acceptable place to address contraception, suggesting the pediatric clinic may be a suitable setting for interventions aiming to prevent undesired pregnancies and their sequelae.

Adaptation of the Person-Centered Maternity Care Scale in the United States: Prioritizing the Experiences of Black Women and Birthing People.

INTRODUCTION: Mistreatment by health care providers disproportionately affects Black, Indigenous, and other people of color in the United States. The goal of this study is to adapt the global Person-Centered Maternity Care (PCMC) scale for use in the United States, with particular attention to the experiences of Black women and birthing people. METHODS: We used a community-engaged approach including expert reviews and cognitive interviews to assess content validity, relevance, comprehension, and comprehensiveness of the PCMC items. Surveys of 297 postpartum people, 82% of whom identified as Black, were used for psychometric analysis in which we assessed construct and criterion validity and reliability. The University of California, San Francisco California Preterm Birth Initiative's Community Advisory Board, which consists of community members, community-based health workers, and social service providers in Northern California, provided input during all stages of the project. RESULTS: Through an iterative process of factor analysis, discussions with the Community Advisory Board, and a prioritization survey, we eliminated items that performed poorly in psychometric analysis, yielding a 35-item PCMC-U.S. scale with subscales for dignity and respect, communication and autonomy, and responsive and supportive care. The Cronbach's alpha for the full scale is 0.95 and for the subscales is 0.87. Standardized summative scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating more PCMC. Correlations with related measures indicated high criterion validity. CONCLUSIONS: The 35-item PCMC-U.S. scale and its subscales have high validity and reliability in a sample of predominantly Black women. This scale provides a tool to support efforts to reduce the inequities in birth outcomes experienced by Black, Indigenous, and other people of color.

Development of the person-centered prenatal care scale for people of color.

BACKGROUND: Given the stark disparities in maternal mortality and adverse birth outcomes among Black, indigenous, and other people of color, there is a need to better understand and measure how individuals from these communities experience their care during pregnancy. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to develop and validate a tool that can be used to measure person-centered prenatal care that reflects the experiences of people of color. STUDY DESIGN: We followed standard procedures for scale development-integrated with community-based participatory approaches-to adapt a person-centered maternity care scale that was initially developed and validated for intrapartum care in low-resource countries to reflect the needs and prenatal care experiences of people of color in the United States. The adaptation process included expert reviews with a Community Advisory Board, consisting of community members, community-based health workers, and social service providers from San Francisco, Oakland, and Fresno, to assess content validity. We conducted cognitive interviews with potential respondents to assess the clarity, appropriateness, and relevance of the questions, which were then refined and administered in an online survey to people in California who had given birth in the past year. Data from 293 respondents (84% of whom identified as Black) who received prenatal care were used in psychometric analysis to assess construct and criterion validity and reliability. RESULTS: Exploratory factor analysis yielded 3 factors with eigenvalues of >1, but with 1 dominant factor. A 34-item version of the person-centered prenatal care scale was developed based on factor analyses and recommendations from the Community Advisory Board. We also developed a 26-item version using stricter criteria for relevance, factor loadings, and uniqueness. Items were grouped into 3 conceptual domains representing subscales for "dignity and respect," "communication and autonomy," and "responsive and supportive care." The Cronbach alphas for the 34-item and the 26-item versions and for the subscales were >0.8. Scores based on the sum of responses for the 2 person-centered prenatal care scale versions and all subscales were standardized to range from 0 to 100, where higher scores indicate more person-centered prenatal care. These scores were correlated with global measures of prenatal care satisfaction suggesting good criterion validity. CONCLUSION: We present 2 versions of the person-centered prenatal care scale: a 34-item and a 26-item version. Both versions have high validity and reliability in a sample made up predominantly of Black women. This scale will facilitate measurement to improve person-centered prenatal care for people of color and could contribute to reducing disparities in birth outcomes. The similarity with the original scale also suggests that the person-centered prenatal care may be applicable across different contexts. However, validation with more diverse samples in additional settings is needed.