Access to Prenatal Care Among Patients With Opioid Use Disorder in Florida: Findings From a Secret Shopper Study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate access to prenatal care for pregnant patients receiving medication for opioid use disorder (MOUD) under Medicaid coverage in Florida. METHODS: A cross-sectional, secret shopper study was conducted in which calls were made to randomly selected obstetric clinicians' offices in Florida. Callers posed as a 14-week-pregnant patient with Medicaid insurance who was receiving MOUD from another physician and requested to schedule a first-time prenatal care appointment. Descriptive statistics were used to report our primary outcome, the callers' success in obtaining appointments from Medicaid-enrolled physicians' offices. Wait time for appointments and reasons the physician offices refused appointments to callers were collected. RESULTS: Overall, 2,816 obstetric clinicians are enrolled in Florida Medicaid. Callers made 1,747 attempts to contact 1,023 randomly selected physicians' offices from June to September 2021. Only 48.9% of medical offices (n=500) were successfully reached by phone, of which 39.4% (n=197) offered a prenatal care appointment to the caller. The median wait time until the first appointment was 15 days (quartile 1: 7; quartile 3: 26), with a range of 0-55 days. However, despite offering an appointment, 8.6% of the medical offices stated that they do not accept Medicaid insurance payment or would accept only self-pay. Among the 60.6% of callers unable to secure an appointment, the most common reasons were that the clinician was not accepting patients taking methadone (34.7%) or was not accepting any new patients with Medicaid insurance (23.8%) and that the pregnancy would be too advanced by the time of the first available appointment (7.3%). CONCLUSION: This secret shopper study found that the majority of obstetric clinicians' offices enrolled in Florida Medicaid do not accept pregnant patients with Medicaid insurance who are taking MOUD. Policy changes are needed to ensure access to adequate prenatal care for patients with opioid use disorder.

Assessing hospital differences in low-risk cesarean delivery metrics in Florida.

BACKGROUND: Unnecessary cesarean deliveries lead to increased maternal and neonatal morbidities and mortalities. In 2020, Florida had a cesarean delivery rate of 35.9%, the third highest in the nation. An effective quality improvement strategy to reduce overall cesarean delivery rates is to decrease primary cesarean deliveries in low-risk births (nulliparous, term, singleton, vertex). Of note, 3 nationally accepted hospital measures of low-risk cesarean delivery rates include the nulliparous, term, singleton, vertex; Joint Commission; and Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine metrics. Comparing metrics is necessary because accurate and timely measurement is essential to support multihospital quality improvement efforts to reduce low-risk cesarean delivery rates and improve the quality of maternal care. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess differences in hospital low-risk cesarean delivery rates in Florida using 5 different metrics of low-risk cesarean delivery rate based on (1) risk methodology, nulliparous, term, singleton, vertex; Joint Commission; and Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine metrics, and (2) data source, linked birth certificate and hospital discharge records and hospital discharge records only. STUDY DESIGN: This was a population-based study of live Florida births from 2016 to 2019 to compare 5 approaches to calculating low-risk cesarean delivery rates. Analyses were performed using linked birth certificate data and inpatient hospital discharge data. The 5 low-risk cesarean delivery measures were defined as follows: nulliparous, term, singleton, vertex birth certificate; Joint Commission-linked used Joint Commission exclusions; Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine-linked used Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine exclusions; Joint Commission hospital discharge with Joint Commission exclusions; and Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine hospital discharge with Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine exclusions. Nulliparous, term, singleton, vertex birth certificate was based on data from birth certificates and not using linked hospital discharge data. Designated as nulliparous, term, singleton, vertex, it does not exclude other high-risk conditions. The second and third measures (Joint Commission-linked used Joint Commission exclusions and Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine-linked used Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine exclusions) use data elements from the full-linked dataset to designate nulliparous, term, singleton, vertex and excluded several high-risk conditions. The last 2 measures (Joint Commission hospital discharge with Joint Commission exclusions; and Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine hospital discharge with Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine exclusions) were based on data from hospital discharge data only and not using linked birth certificate data. These measures generally reflect term, singleton, and vertex because parity could not be assessed adequately on hospital discharge data. Hospital differences between these 5 measures were calculated overall and by neonatal intensive care unit level. RESULTS: Overall, the median of hospital low-risk cesarean rates decreased across the measures, from NTSV-BC 30.7%, to Joint Commission linked 29.1%, and Society for Maternal Fetal Medicine hospital discharge 29.2% with a large decrease to Joint Commission hospital discharge 19.4% and Society for Maternal Fetal Medicine hospital discharge 18.1%. A similar trend was seen by neonatal intensive care unit level. For each of the measures, level II had the highest median low-risk cesarean rates (nulliparous. term, singleton, vertex birth certificate) 32.7%, Joint Commission linked (31.4%), Society for Maternal Fetal Medicine linked: 31.1%, Society for Maternal Fetal Medicine hospital discharge 19.3%), except for level III Joint Commission hospital discharge (20.0%). A comparison of the median number of low-risk births overall and by neonatal intensive care unit level showed a decreasing number across the linked and hospital discharge measures. Again, a wide gap in low-risk cesarean delivery rates was identified between linked measures and hospital discharge measures. However, this gap narrowed as hospital rates increased. CONCLUSION: Quality monitoring of low-risk cesarean delivery rates measured by the nulliparous, term, singleton, vertex metric using the birth certificate was fairly accurate and provided timely assessment for use by Florida hospitals. The nulliparous, term, singleton, vertex birth certificate rates were comparable with low-risk metrics using the linked data source. Overall, metrics used within the same data source had similar rates, with the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine metric having the lowest rates. Across data sources, metrics using hospital discharge data only resulted in substantially underestimated rates because of the inclusion of multiparous women and should be interpreted with caution.

Race and Ethnicity Misclassification in Hospital Discharge Data and the Impact on Differences in Severe Maternal Morbidity Rates in Florida.

Hospital discharge (HD) records contain important information that is used in public health and health care sectors. It is becoming increasingly common to rely mostly or exclusively on HD data to assess and monitor severe maternal morbidity (SMM) overall and by sociodemographic characteristics, including race and ethnicity. Limited studies have validated race and ethnicity in HD or provided estimates on the impact of assessing health differences in maternity populations. This study aims to determine the differences in race and ethnicity reporting between HD and birth certificate (BC) data for maternity hospitals in Florida and to estimate the impact of race and ethnicity misclassification on state- and hospital-specific SMM rates. We conducted a population-based retrospective study of live births using linked BC and HD records from 2016 to 2019 (n = 783,753). BC data were used as the gold standard. Race and ethnicity were categorized as non-Hispanic (NH)-White, NH-Black, Hispanic, NH-Asian Pacific Islander (API), and NH-American Indian or Alaskan Native (AIAN). Overall, race and ethnicity misclassification and its impact on SMM at the state- and hospital levels were estimated. At the state level, NH-AIAN women were the most misclassified (sensitivity: 28.2%; positive predictive value (PPV): 25.2%) and were commonly classified as NH-API (30.3%) in HD records. NH-API women were the next most misclassified (sensitivity: 57.3%; PPV: 85.4%) and were commonly classified as NH-White (5.8%) or NH-other (5.5%). At the hospital level, wide variation in sensitivity and PPV with negative skewing was identified, particularly for NH-White, Hispanic, and NH-API women. Misclassification did not result in large differences in SMM rates at the state level for all race and ethnicity categories except for NH-AIAN women (% difference 78.7). However, at the hospital level, Hispanic women had wide variability of a percent difference in SMM rates and were more likely to have underestimated SMM rates. Reducing race and ethnicity misclassification on HD records is key in assessing and addressing SMM differences and better informing surveillance, research, and quality improvement efforts.

Exploring Patients' Needs and Desires for Quality Prenatal Care in Florida, United States.

Background and Objective: High-quality prenatal care promotes adequate care throughout pregnancy by increasing patients' desires to return for follow-up visits. Almost 15% of women in the United States receive inadequate prenatal care, with 6% receiving late or no prenatal care. Only 63% of pregnant women in Florida receive adequate prenatal care, and little is known about their perceptions of high-quality prenatal care. Therefore, the objective of this study was to assess women's perceptions of the quality of their prenatal care and to describe their preferences for seeking prenatal care that meets their needs. Methods: From April to December 2019, a qualitative study was conducted with postpartum women (n = 55) who received no or late prenatal care and delivered in Tampa, Florida, USA. Eligible women completed an open-ended qualitative survey and a semi-structured in-depth interview. The interview contextualized the factors influencing prenatal care quality perceptions. The qualitative data analysis was based on Donabedian's quality of care model. Results: The qualitative data analysis revealed three key themes about women's perceptions and preferences for prenatal care that meets their needs. First, clinical care processes included provision of health education and medical assessments. Second, structural conditions included language preferences, clinic availability, and the presence of ancillary staff. Finally, interpersonal communication encompassed interactions with providers and continuity of care. Overall, participants desired patient-centered care and care that was informative, tailored to their needs, and worked within the constraints of their daily lives. Conclusion and Global Health Implications: Women seeking and receiving prenatal care prefer a welcoming, patient-centered health care environment. These findings should prompt health care providers and organizations to improve existing prenatal care models and develop new prenatal care models that provide early, accessible, and high-quality prenatal care to a diverse population of maternity patients.

Treatment access for opioid use disorder among women with medicaid in Florida.

INTRODUCTION: Opioid use disorder (OUD) remains prevalent. Medications for OUD (MOUD) are standard care for pregnant and non-pregnant women. Previous research has identified barriers to MOUD for women with Medicaid but did not account for the type of MOUD (methadone vs. buprenorphine) or pregnancy status. We examined access to MOUD by treatment type for pregnant and non-pregnant women with Medicaid in Florida. METHODS: A secondary analysis of Florida "secret-shopper" data was conducted. Calls were made to clinicians from the 2018 Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration provider list by women posing as either a pregnant or non-pregnant woman with OUD and Medicaid. We examined 546 calls to buprenorphine-waivered providers (BWP) and 139 to opioid treatment programs (OTP). Counts and percentages were used to describe caller success by type of treatment and pregnancy status. Chi-square tests were used to identify statistical differences. RESULTS: Only 42 % of calls reached a treatment provider in Florida. Pregnant and non-pregnant women were less likely to obtain an appointment with Medicaid coverage by a BWP than an OTP (p < 0.01). Nearly 40 % of OTPs offered appointments to callers with Medicaid compared to only 17 % of BWPs. Both types of providers denied appointments more often for pregnant women. Thirty-eight percent of BWP's and 12 % of OTP's denied appointments to pregnant women using cash or Medicaid payment. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrates logistical and financial barriers to treatment for OUD among pregnant and non-pregnant women with Medicaid in Florida and highlights the need for improved systems of care.

Evaluation of Virtual Prenatal Care for Obstetric Care Delivery During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Mixed Method Research Study Using the Consolidated Framework in Implementation Research.

Background and Objective: Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), a novel respiratory virus, rapidly spread, and placed patients at increased risk for short and potentially long-standing medical illnesses. The pandemic necessitated the rapid implementation of virtual prenatal care via telemedicine in obstetrics to maintain social distancing measures. The aim of this study was to assess and understand the patient perspectives of the rapidly implemented virtual prenatal care via a telemedicine model during the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic utilizing the Consolidated Framework in Implementation Research (CFIR). Methods: Following the implementation of virtual prenatal care in March 2020, pregnant patients at a large urban clinic in the southeastern United States completed a 19-question anonymous survey that included open and closed-ended questions on their experience receiving virtual prenatal care via telemedicine or in-person prenatal care from May to December 2020. The survey and mixed-methods data analysis was guided by the CFIR framework. Results: A total of 59 patients completed the survey. One-third (31%, n=18) of the patients found virtual prenatal care to be an acceptable alternative model, and half (53%, n=31) found it acceptable only during a pandemic, preferring to return to in-person visits. Qualitative analysis found that some patients were deterred by limited in-person examinations and uncertainty with the virtual platform, while others appreciated the reduced need for transportation, childcare, and time spent. Conclusion and Global Health Implications: Most patients found virtual prenatal care to be easy to access and an acceptable alternative during the pandemic; however, most would prefer to return to in-person prenatal care visits. Future comparative research studies should examine how, among others, virtual prenatal care versus in-person prenatal care impacts specific maternal and fetal outcomes.

Evaluation of a Rapid Implementation of Telemedicine for Delivery of Obstetric Care During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Introduction: The aim of this evaluation was to assess the rapid implementation of obstetric telemedicine during the COVID-19 pandemic using the Consolidated Framework in Implementation Research (CFIR) evaluation framework. Study Design: Following 1 month of telemedicine implementation, obstetric providers at the University of South Florida clinic completed qualitative surveys and in-depth interviews about the implementation of obstetric telemedicine in the clinic guided by the CFIR evaluation framework. Results: Overall, providers considered obstetric telemedicine comparable to traditional in-person clinic visits and acknowledged that they were adequately prepared for the telemedicine implementation. They perceived that obstetric telemedicine mostly met the needs of patients in terms of convenience and comfort of visits, decreased exposure to COVID-19 infection, and the ability of the patient to listen to fetal heart sounds if at-home doppler monitoring was available. Conclusions: The implementation of the obstetric telemedicine care model was deemed a favorable alternative option for patients during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Health care system barriers and facilitators to early prenatal care among diverse women in Florida.

BACKGROUND: Worldwide, women continue to experience barriers to accessing early prenatal care. Given the unique nature of the United States health care system, this study aimed to identify barriers and facilitators to early prenatal care reported by women in Florida. METHODS: A mixed-methods study of postpartum women with entry to care after 14 weeks' gestation was conducted at a tertiary care hospital in Florida. First, eligible women completed a survey including demographic characteristics and open-ended questions on prenatal care barriers. Second, a semi-structured interview was conducted to contextualize the conditions of access. The qualitative analysis was based on the combined theoretical frameworks of Phillippi and Khan. RESULTS: The majority of the 55 participants self-identified as Hispanic (n = 28, 51%), non-Hispanic White (n = 12, 22%), or non-Hispanic Black (n = 9, 16%). Quantitative analysis identified frequent barriers, including the following: "couldn't get an appointment when wanted one" (n = 24, 47%); "didn't have insurance" (n = 21, 41%); and "not aware of pregnancy" (n = 21, 41%). From the combined quantitative and qualitative analyses, three major themes emerged that help to explain barriers faced by birthing people in Florida: personal factors (mental health, awareness of pregnancy, considering abortion, tumultuous life), community conditions (transportation, stigma/fear, social support), and health care system (language barriers, delay at clinic level, cost of care). DISCUSSION: Barriers to early prenatal care are multifaceted and operate at personal, societal, and health care systems levels. Prenatal care practitioners have multiple potential targets for interventions at the clinic level to help mitigate barriers to early prenatal care. Strategies should include health care policy reforms to Medicaid access and interventions at the clinic level aimed at fast-tracking access to care.

Multilevel factors associated with length of stay for neonatal abstinence syndrome in Florida's NICUs: 2010-2015.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate potential factors influencing initial length of hospital stay (LOS) for infants with neonatal abstinence syndrome (NAS) in Florida. METHODS: The study population included 2984 term, singleton live births in 33 Florida hospitals. We used hierarchical linear modeling to evaluate the association of community, hospital, and individual factors with LOS. RESULTS: The average LOS of infants diagnosed with NAS varied significantly across hospitals. Individual-level factors associated with increased LOS for NAS included event year (P < 0.001), gestational age at birth (P < 0.001), maternal age (P = 0.002), maternal race and ethnicity (P < 0.001), maternal education (P = 0.032), and prenatal care adequacy (P < 0.001). Average annual hospital NAS volume (P = 0.022) was a significant hospital factor. CONCLUSION: NAS varies widely across hospitals in Florida. In addition to focusing on treatment regimens, to reduce LOS, public health and quality improvement initiatives should identify and adopt strategies that can minimize the prevalence and impact of these contributing factors.

Implementation of Obstetric Telehealth During COVID-19 and Beyond.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this article is to illustrate and discuss the impact the 2019 novel Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic on the delivery of obstetric care, including a discussion on the preexisting barriers, prenatal framework and need for transition to telehealth. DESCRIPTION: The COVID-19 was first detected in China in December of 2019 and by March 2020 spread to the United States. As this virus has been associated with severe illness, it poses a threat to vulnerable populations-including pregnant women. The obstetric population already faces multiple barriers to receiving quality healthcare due to personal, environmental and economic barriers, now challenged with the additional risks of COVID-19 exposure and limited care in times much defined by social distancing. ASSESSMENT: The current prenatal care framework requires patients to attend multiple in-office prenatal visits that can exponentially multiply depending on maternal and fetal comorbidities. To decrease the rate of transmission of the COVID-19 and limit exposure to patients, providers in Hillsborough County, Florida (and nationwide) are rapidly transitioning to telehealth. The use of a virtual care model allows providers to reduce in-person visits and incorporate virtual visits into the schedule of prenatal care. CONCLUSION: Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, implementation of telehealth and telehealth have become crucial to ensure the safe and effective delivery of obstetric care. This implementation is one that will continue to require attention to planning, procedures and processes, and thoughtful evaluation to ensure the sustainability of telehealth and telehealth post COVID-19 pandemic.