Analysis of Sociodemographic Factors Affecting Ambulatory Surgical Center Discharge Patterns for Endometrial Cancer Hysterectomies.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Investigate outcomes for patients undergoing minimally invasive hysterectomies (MIHs) performed for endometrial cancer at ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs). DESIGN: Our study aimed to explore the feasibility and discharge outcomes for MIHs for endometrial cancer in an ASC setting by using same-day discharge data. SETTING: The prevalence of MIH for endometrial cancer between 2016 and 2019 was estimated from the Nationwide Ambulatory Surgery Sample. PATIENTS: Patients who underwent MIHs for endometrial cancer at an ASC were included. INTERVENTIONS: N/A MEASUREMENTS MAIN RESULTS: Weighted estimates of prevalence and association between discharge status and sociodemographic factors were explored. Same-day discharge was defined as discharge on the day of surgery, and delayed discharge was defined as discharge after the day of surgery. An estimated 95 041 MIHs for endometrial cancer were performed at ASCs between 2016 and 2019. Notably, 91.9% (n = 87 372) resulted in same-day discharge, 1.2% (n = 1121) had delayed discharge, and 6.9% (n = 6548) had missing discharge information; 78.7% procedures (n = 68 812) were performed at public hospitals. The proportion of delayed discharges were lower in private, not-for profit ASCs (0.8%, p = .03) than public hospitals. Patients who had delayed discharges on average were older (69.7 vs 62.4 years, p <.001), more likely to have comorbid conditions including diabetes (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.48, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.25-1.75) and overweight or obese body mass indices (aOR 1.18, 95% CI 1.01-1.39), and more likely to have public insurance (aOR 1.78, 95% CI 1.40-2.25). CONCLUSION: MIHs for endometrial cancer are feasible in an ASC. Optimal candidates for receipt of MIHs for endometrial cancer at an ASC are patients who are younger and have less comorbidities, lower body mass index, and private insurance.

Human papillomavirus vaccination receipt and provider counseling rates among high-risk patients.

OBJECTIVE: We describe provider documented counseling patterns and perception regarding HPV vaccination among patients with a history of cervical dysplasia. METHODS: All patients ages 21-45 who underwent colposcopy at a single academic medical center from 2018 to 2020were sent a self-administered survey through the electronic medical record patient portal to assess their attitudes regarding human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination. Demographic information, HPV vaccination history, and documented obstetrics and gynecology provider counseling at the time of colposcopy were examined. RESULTS: Of 1465patients, 434 (29.6 %) reported or had documented receipt of at least one dose of the human papillomavirus vaccine. The remainder reported they were not vaccinated or had no documentation of vaccination. Proportion of vaccinated patients was higher among White compared to Black and Asian patients (P = 0.02). On multivariate analysis, private insurance (aOR 2.2, 95 % CI 1.4-3.7) was associated with vaccinated status while Asian race (aOR 0.4, 95 % CI 0.2-0.7) and hypertension (aOR 0.2, 95 % CI 0.08-0.7) were less likely to be associated with vaccination status. Among patients with unvaccinated or unknown vaccination status, 112 (10.8 %) received documented counseling regardingcatch-up human papillomavirus vaccination at a gynecologic visit. Patients seen by a sub-specialist obstetrics and gynecologic provider were more likely to have documented provider counseling regarding vaccination compared to those seen by a generalist obstetric/gynecologist provider (26 % vs 9.8 %, p < 0.001). Patients cited lack of physician discussion (53.7 %) and the belief that they were too old to receive the HPV vaccine (48.8 %) as the main reasons for remaining unvaccinated. CONCLUSION: HPV vaccination and the rate of obstetric and gynecologic provider counseling regarding HPV vaccination among patients undergoing colposcopy remains low. When surveyed, many patients with a history of colposcopy cited provider recommendation as afactor in their decision to undergo adjuvant HPV vaccination, demonstrating the importance of provider counseling in thisgroup.

Pediatric and Adolescent Obstetric and Gynecologic Encounters in US Emergency Departments: A Cross-Sectional Study.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To describe pediatric and adolescent obstetric and gynecologic diagnoses presenting at emergency departments (EDs) in the United States. METHODS: This was a retrospective, cross-sectional study design that utilized the Nationwide Emergency Department Sample (NEDS), which comprised hospital-owned EDs throughout the United States in 2018. The participants included a sample set of female patients from birth to 18 years old. All obstetric and gynecologic (OB/GYN) International Classification of Disease (ICD-10) codes were categorized. Descriptive, bivariate, and multivariate analyses were used to assess diagnoses by age group, hospital type, ED disposition (eg, admission and transfer), payer, and median household income. RESULTS: In 2018, there were 518,244 OB/GYN ED visits by female patients aged less than or equal to 18 years. Vulvovaginal disorders and abnormal uterine bleeding were among the top 5 presentations in all age groups. The top diagnoses varied by age group. Diagnoses with higher morbidity and mortality (ovarian torsion and ectopic pregnancy) had higher admission and transfer rates compared with diagnoses that can be commonly managed in the outpatient setting (vulvar or vaginal disorders). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study that evaluated OB/GYN diagnoses in pediatric and adolescent patients presenting to the ED. Educational and referral efforts should focus on not only emergency diagnoses, such as ovarian torsion, adnexal masses, and ectopic pregnancy, but also common presentations that can often be managed in the outpatient setting, such as vulvovaginal disorders and abnormal uterine bleeding.

Who is providing contraception care in the United States? An observational study of the contraception workforce.

BACKGROUND: Contraception care is essential to providing comprehensive healthcare; however, little is known nationally about the contraception workforce. Previous research has examined the supply, distribution, and adequacy of the health workforce providing contraception services, but this research has faced a series of data limitations, relying on surveys or focusing on a subset of practitioners and resulting in an incomplete picture of contraception practitioners in the United States. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to construct a comprehensive database of the contraceptive workforce in the United States that provides the following 6 types of highly effective contraception: intrauterine device, implant, shot (depot medroxyprogesterone acetate), oral contraception, hormonal patch, and vaginal ring. In addition, we aimed to examine the difference in supply, distribution, the types of contraception services offered, and Medicaid participation. STUDY DESIGN: We constructed a national database of contraceptive service providers using multiple data sets: IQVIA prescription claims, preadjudicated medical claims, and the OneKey healthcare provider data set; the National Plan and Provider Enumeration System data set; and the Census Bureau's American Community Survey data on population demographics. All statistical analyses were descriptive, including chi-squared tests for groupwise differences and pairwise post hoc tests with Bonferroni corrections for multiple comparisons. RESULTS: Although 73.1% of obstetrician-gynecologists and 72.6% of nurse-midwives prescribed the pill, patch, or ring, only 51.4% of family medicine physicians, 32.4% of pediatricians, and 19.8% of internal medicine physicians do so. The ratio of all primary care providers prescribing contraception to the female population of reproductive age (ages, 15-44 years) varied substantially across states, with a range of 27.9 providers per 10,000 population in New Jersey to 74.2 providers per 10,000 population in Maine. In addition, there are substantial differences across states for Medicaid acceptance. Of the obstetrician-gynecologists providing contraception, the percentage of providers who prescribe contraception to Medicaid patients ranged from 83.9% (District of Columbia) to 100% (North Dakota); for family medicine physicians, it ranged from 49.7% (Florida) to 91.1% (Massachusetts); and for internal medicine physicians, it ranged from 25.0% (Texas) to 75.9% (Delaware). For in-person contraception, there were large differences in the proportion of providers offering the 3 different contraceptive method types (intrauterine device, implant, and shot) by provider specialty. CONCLUSION: This study found a significant difference in the distribution, types of contraception, and Medicaid participation of the contraception workforce. In addition to obstetrician-gynecologists and nurse-midwives, family medicine physicians, internal medicine physicians, pediatricians, advanced practice nurses, and physician assistants are important contraception providers. However, large gaps remain in the provision of highly effective services such as intrauterine devices and implants. Future research should examine provider characteristics, programs, and policies associated with the provision of different contraception services.

Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) Screening and Referral Outcomes among Transgender Patients in a Primary Care Setting.

Transgender patients are at elevated risk of intimate partner violence (IPV), but national guidelines do not recommend routine screening for this population. This paper explores the feasibility and effectiveness of routine IPV screening of transgender patients in a primary care setting by describing an existing screening program and identifying factors associated with referral and engagement in IPV-related care for transgender patients. An IPV "referral cascade" was created for 1,947 transgender primary care patients at an urban community health center who were screened for IPV between January 1, 2014 to May 31, 2016: (a) Of those screening positive, how many were referred? (b) Of those referred, how many engaged in IPV-specific care within 3 months? Logistic regression identified demographic correlates of referral and engagement. Of the 1,947 transgender patients screened for IPV, 227 screened positive. 110/227 (48.5%) were referred to either internal or external IPV-related services. Of those referred to on-site services, 65/103 (63.1%) had an IPV-related appointment within 3 months of a positive screen. IPV referral was associated with being assigned male at birth (AMAB) versus assigned female at birth (AFAB) (AOR = 2.69, 95% CI 1.52, 4.75) and with nonbinary, rather than binary, gender identity (AOR = 2.07, 95%CI 1.09, 3.73). Engagement in IPV-related services was not associated with any measured demographic characteristics. Similar to published rates for cisgender women, half of transgender patients with positive IPV screens received referrals and two-thirds of those referred engaged in IPV-specific care. These findings support routine IPV screening and referral for transgender patients in primary care settings. Provider training should focus on how to ensure referrals are made for all transgender patients who screen positive for IPV, regardless of gender identity, to ensure the benefits of screening accrue equally for all patients.

Use of postpartum contraception during coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): A retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess how use of postpartum contraception (PPC) changed during the COVID-19 public health emergency. METHODS: Billing and coding data from a single urban institution (n = 1797) were used to compare use of PPC in patients who delivered from March to June 2020 (COVID Cohort, n = 927) and from March to June 2019 (Comparison Cohort, n = 895). χ2 and multivariable logistic regression models assessed relationships between cohorts, use of contraception, and interactions with postpartum visits and race/ethnicity. RESULTS: In the COVID Cohort, 585 women (64%) attended postpartum visits (n = 488, 83.4%, via telemedicine) compared to 660 (74.7%, in-person) in the Comparison Cohort (P < 0.01). Total use of PPC remained similar: 30.4% (n = 261) in the COVID Cohort and 29.6% (n = 278) in the Comparison Cohort (P = 0.69). Compared to in-person visits in the Comparison Cohort, telemedicine visits in the COVID Cohort had similar odds of insertion of long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.13, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.78-1.6), but higher odds of inpatient insertion (aOR 6.4, 95% CI 1.7-24.9). Black patients compared to white patients were more likely to initiate inpatient LARC (aOR 7.29, 95% CI 1.81-29.4) compared to the Comparison Cohort (aOR 3.63, 95% CI 0.29-46.19). CONCLUSION: Use of PPC remained similar during COVID-19 with a decrease of in-person postpartum visits, new adoption of postpartum telemedicine visits, and an increase in inpatient insertion of LARC with higher odds of inpatient placement among black patients.