Alcohol Use, Screening, and Brief Intervention Among Pregnant Persons - 24 U.S. Jurisdictions, 2017 and 2019.

Alcohol use during pregnancy is a major preventable cause of adverse alcohol-related outcomes, including birth defects and developmental disabilities.* Alcohol screening and brief intervention (ASBI) is an evidence-based primary care tool that has been shown to prevent or reduce alcohol consumption during pregnancy; interventions have resulted in an increase in the proportion of pregnant women reporting abstinence (odds ratio = 2.26; 95% CI = 1.43-3.56) (1). Previous national estimates have not characterized ASBI in populations of pregnant persons. Using 2017 and 2019 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) data, CDC examined prevalence of ASBI and characteristics of pregnant persons and nonpregnant women aged 18-49 years (reproductive-aged women) residing in jurisdictions that participated in the BRFSS ASBI module. During their most recent health care visit within the past 2 years, approximately 80% of pregnant persons reported being asked about their alcohol use; however, only 16% of pregnant persons who self-reported current drinking at the time of the survey (at least one alcoholic beverage in the past 30 days) were advised by a health care provider to quit drinking or reduce their alcohol use. Further, the prevalence of screening among pregnant persons who did not graduate from high school was lower than that among those who did graduate from high school or had at least some college education. This gap between screening and brief intervention, along with disparities in screening based on educational level, indicate missed opportunities to reduce alcohol use during pregnancy. Strategies to enhance ASBI during pregnancy include integrating screenings into electronic health records, increasing reimbursement for ASBI services, developing additional tools, including electronic ASBI, that can be implemented in a variety of settings (2,3).

Naloxone Use During Pregnancy-Data from 26 US Jurisdictions, 2019-2020.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to determine the prevalence of self-reported naloxone use during pregnancy among people in the United States with a recent live birth. A secondary objective was to characterize people at increased risk of overdose who did and did not use naloxone. METHODS: We analyzed data from the Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System from 26 US jurisdictions that conducted an opioid supplement survey from 2019 to 2020. Respondents with increased risk of experiencing an opioid overdose were identified based on self-reported use of illicit amphetamines, heroin, cocaine, or receiving medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) during pregnancy. Weighted prevalence estimates and 95% confidence intervals were calculated for reported naloxone use at any point during pregnancy among people with an increased risk of overdose. RESULTS: Naloxone use during pregnancy was reported by <1% of the overall study population (unweighted N = 88/34,528). Prevalence of naloxone use was 5.0% (95% CI: 0.0-10.6) among respondents who reported illicit amphetamine use, 15.2% (1.8-28.6) among those who reported heroin use, and 17.6% (0.0-38.1) among those who reported cocaine use. Naloxone use was 14.5% (8.4-20.6) among those who reported taking MOUD. Among people with increased risk of overdose, no significant differences in naloxone use were observed by age, race/ethnicity, education level, residential metropolitan status, or insurance status. CONCLUSIONS: Prevalence of naloxone use among people with an increased risk of overdose during pregnancy ranged from 5.0% to 17.6%. Access to naloxone, overdose prevention education, and treatment for substance use disorders may help reduce morbidity and mortality.

Polysubstance use during pregnancy: The importance of screening, patient education, and integrating a harm reduction perspective.

BACKGROUND: Substance use during pregnancy is associated with poor health outcomes. This study assessed substance use, polysubstance use, and use of select prescription medications during pregnancy. METHODS: We analyzed 2019 data from the Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System in 25 United States jurisdictions that included questions on prescription medications, tobacco, and illicit substance use during pregnancy. Alcohol and electronic cigarette use were assessed during the last three months of pregnancy, and all other substances and medications were assessed throughout pregnancy. Weighted prevalence estimates and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. RESULTS: Nearly one-fifth of respondents who reported use of any substance reported use of at least one other substance during pregnancy. Cigarettes (8.1%; 95% CI 7.6-8.7%) and alcohol (7.4%; 95% CI 6.7-8.1%) were the most frequently reported substances, followed by cannabis (4.3%; 95% CI 3.9-4.7%). Substance use was higher among individuals who reported having depression or using antidepressants during pregnancy compared with those who did not report depression or antidepressant use. Illicit drug use prevalence was low (0.5%, 95% CI 0.4-0.7%); however, respondents reporting heroin use also frequently reported use of illicit stimulants (amphetamines: 51.7%, 95% CI 32.1-71.3% or cocaine: 26.5%, 95% CI 11.9-41.1%). Although prenatal clinician screening for alcohol and cigarette use was approximately 95%, fewer respondents (82.1%) reported being screened for cannabis or illicit substance use during pregnancy. CONCLUSIONS: One in five individuals who reported use of any substance during pregnancy engaged in polysubstance use, highlighting the importance of comprehensive screening and evidence-based interventions including harm reduction.

The Postpartum Period: An Opportunity for Alcohol Screening and Counseling to Reduce Adverse Health Impacts.

OBJECTIVES: The postpartum period presents an opportunity to engage in discussions about alcohol consumption and related health harms. This study examined the prevalence of alcohol consumption among a sample of postpartum persons with a recent live birth and screening and brief intervention (alcohol SBI) or counseling by their providers. METHODS: We analyzed 2019 data from a telephone survey conducted 9 to 10 months postpartum among individuals who responded to the standard Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System survey in 6 states. Weighted prevalence estimates were calculated for alcohol consumption and alcohol SBI after birth through up to 10 months postpartum. RESULTS: Among 1790 respondents, 53.1% reported consuming alcohol postpartum. Among those who drank postpartum, 70.8% reported being asked about alcohol use by a healthcare provider. Slightly more than half of respondents who drank postpartum and were trying to get pregnant (52.4%) or were not using birth control at the time of the survey (59.8%) reported being asked about alcohol use. Approximately 25% of respondents who drank alcohol postpartum were advised about risky alcohol levels by a healthcare provider. Small proportions of individuals who drank alcohol postpartum and were pregnant or trying to get pregnant at the time of the survey were advised to reduce or stop drinking alcohol (10.6% and 2.3%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest missed opportunities to promote health and prevent adverse alcohol-related health outcomes during the postpartum period through evidence-based tools such as alcohol SBI.

"I don't regret it at all. It's just I wish the process had a bit more humanity to it a bit more holistic": a qualitative, community-led medication abortion study with Black and Latinx Women in Georgia, USA.

Traditional family planning research has excluded Black and Latinx leaders, and little is known about medication abortion (MA) among racial/ethnic minorities, although it is an increasingly vital reproductive health service, particularly after the fall of Roe v. Wade. Reproductive justice (RJ) community-based organisation (CBO) SisterLove led a study on Black and Latinx women's MA perceptions and experiences in Georgia. From April 2019 to December 2020, we conducted key informant interviews with 20 abortion providers and CBO leaders and 32 in-depth interviews and 6 focus groups (n = 30) with Black and Latinx women. We analysed data thematically using a team-based, iterative approach of coding, memo-ing, and discussion. Participants described multilevel barriers to and strategies for MA access, wishing that "the process had a bit more humanity … [it] should be more holistic." Barriers included (1) sociocultural factors (intersectional oppression, intersectional stigma, and medical experimentation); (2) national and state policies; (3) clinic- and provider-related factors (lack of diverse clinic staff, long waiting times); and (4) individual-level factors (lack of knowledge and social support). Suggested solutions included (1) social media campaigns and story-sharing; (2) RJ-based policy advocacy; (3) diversifying clinic staff, offering flexible scheduling and fees, community integration of abortion, and RJ abortion funds; and (4) social support (including abortion doulas) and comprehensive sex education. Findings suggest that equitable MA access for Black and Latinx communities in the post-Roe era will require multi-level intervention, informed by community-led evidence production; holistic, de-medicalised, and human rights-based care models; and intersectional RJ policy advocacy.