Use of open-text responses to recode categorical survey data on postpartum contraception use among women in the United States: A mixed-methods inquiry of Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System data.

BACKGROUND: Postpartum contraception prevents unintended pregnancies and short interpregnancy intervals. The Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System (PRAMS) collects population-based data on postpartum contraception nonuse and reasons for not using postpartum contraception. In addition to quantitative questions, PRAMS collects open-text responses that are typically left unused by secondary quantitative analyses. However, abundant preexisting open-text data can serve as a resource for improving quantitative measurement accuracy and qualitatively uncovering unexpected responses. We used PRAMS survey questions to explore unprompted reasons for not using postpartum contraception and offer insight into the validity of categorical responses. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We used 31,208 categorical 2012 PRAMS survey responses from postpartum women in the US to calculate original prevalences of postpartum contraception use and nonuse and reasons for contraception nonuse. A content analysis of open-text responses systematically recoded data to mitigate survey bias and ensure consistency, resulting in adjusted prevalence calculations and identification of other nonuse themes. Recoded contraception nonuse slightly differed from original reports (21.5% versus 19.4%). Both calculations showed that many respondents reporting nonuse may be at a low risk for pregnancy due to factors like tubal ligation or abstinence. Most frequent nonuse reasons were not wanting to use birth control (27.1%) and side effect concerns (25.0%). Other open-text responses showed common themes of infertility, and breastfeeding as contraception. Comparing quantitative and qualitative responses revealed contradicting information, suggesting respondent misinterpretation and confusion surrounding the term "pregnancy prevention." Though this analysis may be limited by manual coding error and researcher biases, we avoided coding exhaustion via 1-hour coding periods and validated reliability through intercoder kappa scores. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we observed that respondents reporting contraception nonuse often described other methods of pregnancy prevention and contraception barriers that were not included in categorical response options. Open-text responses shed light on a more comprehensive list of pregnancy prevention methods and nonuse options. Our findings contribute to survey questions that can lead to more accurate depiction of postpartum contraceptive behavior. Additionally, future use of these qualitative methods may be used to improve other health behavior survey development and resulting data.

Diagnostic and economic evaluation of a point-of-care test for respiratory syncytial virus.

Respiratory syncytial virus is a common cause of bronchiolitis. Historically, point-of-care tests have involved antigen detection technology with limited sensitivity. The aim of this study was to prospectively evaluate the diagnostic accuracy and model the economic impact of the Roche cobas® Liat® point-of-care influenza A/B and respiratory syncytial virus test. The "DEC-RSV" study was a multi-centre, prospective, observational study in children under 2 years presenting with viral respiratory symptoms. A nasopharyngeal aspirate sample was tested using the point-of-care test and standard laboratory-based procedures. The primary outcome was accuracy of respiratory syncytial virus detection. The cost implications of adopting a point-of-care test were modelled using study data. A total of 186 participants were recruited, with both tests performed on 177 samples. The point-of-care test was invalid for 16 samples (diagnostic yield 91%) leaving 161 available for primary analysis. After resolving discrepancies, the cobas® Liat® respiratory syncytial virus test had 100.00% (95% CI 96.07%-100.00%) sensitivity and 98.53% (95% CI 92.08%-99.96%) specificity. Median time to result was 0.6 h (interquartile range (IQR) 0.5-1) for point-of-care testing and 28.9 h (IQR 26.3-48.1) for standard laboratory testing. Estimated non-diagnostic cost savings for 1000 patients, based on isolation decision-making on point-of-care test result, were £57 010, which would increase to £94 847 when cohort nursing is used. In young children the cobas® Liat® point-of-care respiratory syncytial virus test has high diagnostic accuracy using nasopharyngeal aspirates (currently an off-licence sample type). Time to result is clinically important and was favourable compared to laboratory-based testing. The potential exists for cost savings when adopting the point-of-care test.

Hospice agencies' hospital contract status and differing levels of hospice care.

In response to a 2011 finding that approximately 27% of Medicare-certified hospices do not provide a single day of general inpatient care (GIP), the authors explored the extent to which hospices have contracts with hospitals for GIP. Using the 2007 National Home and Hospice Care Survey, we estimated that 1119 (32%) agencies had no contract with any hospitals in 2007 and half of those with no contract did not have a contract with a skilled nursing facility (SNF) either. As a result, these hospices were unable to provide GIP referrals for those in need of inpatient care for acute pain and symptom management. More importantly, not having a contract with a hospital was just one of the factors influencing GIP provision. In the multivariate logistic model, after controlling for contract status with a hospital and other hospice characteristics, agencies in the second quartile of hospice patient census (12-29 vs 73 or more, adjusted odds ratio = 14.10; 95% confidence interval 4.26-46.62) were independently related to providing only routine home care. These hospices are more likely to rely solely on scatter beds for GIP provision. Given that a significant portion of hospices do not have a contract with a hospital, policy makers need to understand barriers to contracts with a hospital/SNF for GIP and consider a hospice's contract status as one of the standards for hospice certification. In addition, further research is necessary to understand why hospices that do have a contract with a hospital do not make GIP referral.