Emergency contraception subsidy in Canada: a comparative policy analysis.

BACKGROUND: In Canada, cost prohibits access to emergency contraception (EC) which may assist to prevent unintended pregnancy. The drug, ulipristal acetate (UPA-EC), is more clinically effective and cost-effective than the prior standard levonorgestrel (LNG-EC). We analyzed provincial EC subsidization policies and examined underlying decision-making processes. METHODS: We undertook documentary analysis of provincial EC subsidization policies in publicly available drug formularies. We conducted semi-structured interviews with key informants to explore the processes underlying current policies. RESULTS: Quebec is the only province to subsidize UPA-EC, whilst all ten provinces subsidize LNG-EC. As such, provincial EC subsidization policies do not align with the latest UPA-EC evidence. Interviews revealed that evidence was valued in the policymaking process and formulary decisions were made through interdisciplinary consensus. CONCLUSIONS: We identify a gap between EC subsidization policies and the latest evidence. Institutional structures affect policies reflecting evolving evidence. Increasing interdisciplinary mechanisms may encourage evidence-based policies.

A Retrospective Study of Clinical Encounters for Pelvic Inflammatory Disease: Missed Opportunities to Screen for Syphilis and HIV?

OBJECTIVE: Missed screening opportunities may contribute to the rising rates of sexually transmitted and blood borne infections (STBBIs) in Manitoba. This study sought to determine the proportion of women who are screened for syphilis and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) when admitted with pelvic inflammatory disease (PID). METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of all inpatient admissions for PID over 3 discrete years (fiscal years 2007, 2012, 2017) at a single tertiary care centre. Data extracted from medical records included STBBI screening performed, clinical signs at presentation, and history of PID or STBBI. To improve the accuracy of our estimates, we complemented the records data with population data from Manitoba. We evaluated predictive factors influencing any or concurrent STBBI screening using bivariate analysis for significance (P < 0.05). RESULTS: One hundred and five admissions met inclusion criteria. Syphilis and HIV screening was ordered concurrently with chlamydia and gonorrhoea screening in 6 (6%) of encounters and was ordered at any point during admission for PID in 28 (27%). A history of substance abuse (odds ratio [OR] 4.94 [95% CI 1.62-15.05] for syphilis screening and OR 6.94 [95% CI 2.38-20.23] for HIV screening) and a positive gonorrhea result while admitted (OR 3.40 [95% CI 1.06-10.88] for syphilis screening) were strongly associated with receiving any screening. Reporting multiple sexual partners was also strongly associated with receiving any STBBI screening while admitted (OR 19.44 [95% CI 2.01-187.92] and OR 15.00 [95% CI 1.58-142.70] for syphilis and HIV screening, respectively). CONCLUSION: A minority of patients were screened for syphilis and HIV while admitted for PID. This study highlights a missed opportunity to screen for STBBI among sexually active women.