Propensity score matching to measure the effect of survey mode on reports of racial and ethnic discrimination in health care.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effect of survey mode (mail vs. telephone) on the likelihood of reporting health care-related discrimination based on race, ethnicity, or nationality. METHODS: We use data from a mixed-mode, mail and telephone survey of public health care program enrollees (N=2807), including Somali, Hmong, African American, American Indian, and Latino populations. Self-reported discrimination was measured as the experience of unfair treatment by health care providers due to race, ethnicity, or nationality. We use propensity score matching to create exchangeable groups of phone and mail respondents based on the probability of completing the survey by phone. RESULTS: Overall, 33.1% of respondents reported having experienced discrimination in health care, but only 23.6% of telephone respondents reported discrimination compared with 36.8% of mail respondents. After matching phone and mail respondents based on probability of responding by telephone, all observable significant differences between respondents that were brought about by differential self-selection into mode were erased, allowing us to estimate the effect of survey mode on report of discrimination. Even after matching, the mode effect remains, where report of health care discrimination for telephone respondents would have been 12.6 percentage points higher had they responded by mail (22.6% vs. 35.2%). CONCLUSIONS: Survey mode has a significant effect on report of discrimination. Respondents may be more willing to disclose experiences of discrimination in a mail survey than to a telephone interviewer. Findings have substantial policy and clinical significance as variation in report of discrimination based on mode may lead to underestimation of the extent of the problem.

Potential benefits of increased access to doula support during childbirth.

OBJECTIVES: The annual costs of US maternity-related hospitalizations exceed $27 billion. Continuous labor support from a trained doula is associated with improved outcomes and potential cost savings. This study aimed to document the relationship between doula support, desire for doula support, and cesarean delivery, distinguishing cesarean deliveries without a definitive medical indication. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of a nationally representative survey of women who delivered a singleton baby in a US hospital in 2011- 2012 (N = 2400). METHODS: Multivariable logistic regression analysis of characteristics associated with doula support and desire for doula support; similar models examine the relationship between doula support, desire for doula support, and 1) any cesarean or 2) nonindicated cesarean. RESULTS: Six percent of women reported doula care during childbirth. Characteristics associated with desiring but not having doula support were black race (vs white; adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.77; 95% CI,1.03-3.03), and publicly insured or uninsured (vs privately insured; AOR = 1.83, CI, 1.17-2.85; AOR = 2.01, CI, 1.07-3.77, respectively). Doula-supported women had lower odds of cesarean compared without doula support and those who desired but did not have doula support (AOR = 0.41, CI, 0.18-0.96; and AOR = 0.31, CI, 0.13-0.74). The odds of nonindicated cesarean were 80-90% lower among doula-supported women (AOR= 0.17, CI, 0.07-0.39; and AOR= 0.11, CI, 0.03-0.36). CONCLUSIONS: Women with doula support have lower odds of nonindicated cesareans than those who did not have a doula as well as those who desired but did not have doula support. Increasing awareness of doula care and access to support from a doula may facilitate decreases in nonindicated cesarean rates.

Use of nonmedical methods of labor induction and pain management among U.S. women.

BACKGROUND: There exists limited documentation of nonmedical methods of labor induction and pain management during childbirth in the United States. We estimated the prevalence of nonmedical interventions for induction and pain management and examined the association between medical and nonmedical care during labor. METHODS: We used a nationally representative survey of U.S. women who gave birth in 2005 (N = 1,382) to examine use of nonmedical methods of labor induction and pain management. Using logistic regression, we calculated odds of nonmedical and medical interventions to induce labor or mitigate pain, and the odds of medical induction and obstetric analgesia by whether nonmedical methods were reported. RESULTS: Nearly 30 percent of women used nonmedical methods to start labor, and over 70 percent of women used nonmedical pain management. Doula support was the strongest predictor of nonmedical methods of labor induction (Adjusted Odds Ratio [AOR] = 3.0) and labor pain management (AOR = 5.7). Use of nonmedical pain management was significantly associated with decreased odds of medical pain management (OR = 0.65); this relationship was attenuated with covariate adjustment. CONCLUSIONS: Nonmedical methods to induce labor and manage pain during childbirth are commonly used by U.S. women. Future research should examine effectiveness of these strategies and their influence on medical services use.