Pattern and correlates of out-of-pocket payment (OOP) on female sterilization in India, 1990-2014.

BACKGROUND: Large scale public investment in family welfare programme has made female sterilization a free service in public health centers in India. Besides, it also provides financial compensation to acceptors. Despite these interventions, the use of contraception from private health centers has increased over time, across states and socio-economic groups in India. Though many studies have examined trends, patterns, and determinants of female sterilization services, studies on out-of-pocket payment (OOP) and compensations on sterilisation are limited in India. This paper examines the trends and variations in out-of-pocket payment (OOP) and compensations associated with female sterilization in India. METHODS: Data from the National Family Health Survey - 4, 2015-16 was used for the analyses. A composite variable based on compensation received and amount paid by users was computed and categorized into four distinct groups. Multivariate analyses were used to understand the significant predictors of OOP of female sterilization. RESULTS: Public health centers continued to be the major providers of female sterilization services; nearly 77.8% had availed themselves of free sterilization and 61.6% had received compensation for female sterilization. About two-fifths of the women in the economically well-off state like Kerala and one-third of the women in a poor state like Bihar had paid but did not receive any compensation for female sterilization. The OOP on female sterilization varies from 70 to 79% across India. The OOP on female sterilization was significantly higher among the educated and women belonging to the higher wealth quintile linking OOP to ability to pay for better quality of care. CONCLUSION: Public sector investment in family planning is required to provide free or subsidized provision of family welfare services, especially to women from a poor household. Improving the quality of female sterilization services in public health centers and rationalizing the compensation may extend the reach of family planning services in India.

A low-cost approach to salpingectomy at cesarean delivery.

There is increasing adoption of opportunistic salpingectomy for ovarian cancer prevention at the time of gynecologic surgery, which includes the postpartum period. However, there is no consensus on an ideal surgical approach for the parturient vasculature. We describe a safe, low-cost, and accessible approach for bilateral salpingectomy during cesarean delivery that we call the "Mesosalpinx Isolation Salpingectomy Technique" (MIST) that can guide institutions to standardize their postpartum salpingectomy procedures when advanced vessel-sealing devices are not available. In the MIST technique, avascular windows are created within the mesosalpinx close to the tubal vessels. The vasculature is thus fully skeletonized and isolated from the adjacent mesosalpinx before suture ligation, which ensures security of the free-tie to the individual vessels and avoids sharp injury to the mesosalpinx. Not using vessel-sealing devices also eliminates the risk of thermal injury to the adjacent ovarian tissue and vasculature and potentially achieves a cost-savings for the hospital and patient. MIST has been performed in 141 cesarean deliveries in the past 4 years. There were no noted bleeding complications during the salpingectomy procedure, blood transfusions, or instances of postoperative surgical reexploration. In our experience, a surgeon who is new to the procedure takes approximately 15 minutes to complete a bilateral salpingectomy. Those surgeons who are experienced in MIST need only 5 minutes. A video is included that demonstrates the technique.

Cost-effectiveness of opportunistic salpingectomy vs tubal ligation at the time of cesarean delivery.

BACKGROUND: Removal of the fallopian tubes at the time of hysterectomy or interval sterilization has become routine practice to prevent ovarian cancer. While emerging as a strategy, uptake of this procedure at the time of cesarean delivery for pregnant women seeking permanent sterilization has not been widely adopted due to perceptions of increased morbidity and operative difficulty with a lack of available data in this setting. OBJECTIVE: We sought to conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis comparing strategies for long-term sterilization and ovarian cancer risk reduction at the time of cesarean delivery, including bilateral tubal ligation, opportunistic salpingectomy, and long-acting reversible contraception. STUDY DESIGN: A decision-analytic and cost-effectiveness model was constructed for pregnant women undergoing cesarean delivery who desired permanent sterilization in the US population, comparing 3 strategies: (1) bilateral tubal ligation, (2) bilateral opportunistic salpingectomy, and (3) postpartum long-acting reversible contraception. This theoretic cohort consisted of 110,000 pregnant women desiring permanent sterilization at the time of cesarean delivery and ovarian cancer prevention at an average of 35 years who were monitored for an additional 40 years based on an average US female life expectancy of 75 years. The primary outcome measure was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Effectiveness was measured as quality-adjusted life years. Secondary outcomes included: the number of ovarian cancer cases and deaths, procedure-related complications, and unintended and ectopic pregnancies. The 1-, 2-, and 3-way and Monte Carlo probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. The willingness-to-pay threshold was set at $100,000. RESULTS: Both bilateral tubal ligation and bilateral opportunistic salpingectomy with cesarean delivery have favorable cost-effectiveness ratios. In the base case analysis, salpingectomy was more cost-effective with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $23,189 per quality-adjusted life year compared to tubal ligation. Long-acting reversible contraception after cesarean was not cost-effective (ie, dominated). Although salpingectomy and tubal ligation were both cost-effective over a wide range of cost and risk estimates, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio analysis was highly sensitive to the uncertainty around the estimates of salpingectomy cancer risk reduction, risk of perioperative complications, and cost. Monte Carlo probabilistic sensitivity analysis estimated that tubal ligation had a 49% chance of being the preferred strategy over salpingectomy. If the true salpingectomy risk of perioperative complications is >2% higher than tubal ligation or if the cancer risk reduction of salpingectomy is <52%, then tubal ligation is the preferred, more cost-effective strategy. CONCLUSION: Bilateral tubal ligation and bilateral opportunistic salpingectomy with cesarean delivery are both cost-effective strategies for permanent sterilization and ovarian cancer risk reduction. Although salpingectomy and tubal ligation are both reasonable strategies for cesarean patients seeking permanent sterilization and cancer risk reduction, threshold analyses indicate that the risks and benefits of salpingectomy with cesarean delivery need to be better defined before a preferred strategy can be determined.

Medicaid and fulfillment of desired postpartum sterilization.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to assess fulfillment of sterilization requests while accounting for the complex interplay between insurance, clinical and social factors in a contemporary context that included both inpatient and outpatient postpartum sterilization procedures. STUDY DESIGN: This is a retrospective single-center cohort chart review study of 1331 women with a documented contraceptive plan at time of postpartum discharge of sterilization. We compared sterilization fulfillment within 90days of delivery, time to sterilization and rate of subsequent pregnancy after nonfulfillment between women with Medicaid and women with private insurance. RESULTS: A total of 475 of 1030 Medicaid-insured and 100 of 154 privately insured women received postpartum sterilization (46.1% vs. 64.9%, p<.001). Women with Medicaid had a longer time from delivery to completion of the sterilization request (p<.001). After adjusting for age, parity, gestational age, mode of delivery, adequacy of prenatal care, race/ethnicity, marital status and education level, private insurance status was not associated with either sterilization fulfillment [odds ratio 0.94, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.54-1.64] or time to sterilization (hazard ratio 1.03, 95% C.I. 0.73-1.34). Of the 555 Medicaid-insured women who did not receive a postpartum sterilization, 267 (48.1%) had valid Title XIX sterilization consent forms at time of delivery. Of women who did not receive sterilization, 132 of 555 Medicaid patients and 5 of 54 privately insured patients became pregnant within 1 year (23.8% vs. 9.3%, p=.023). CONCLUSION: Differences in fulfillment rates of postpartum sterilization and time to sterilization between women with Medicaid versus private insurance are similar after adjusting for relevant clinical and demographic factors. Women with Medicaid are more likely than women with private insurance to have a short interval repeat pregnancy after an unfulfilled sterilization request. IMPLICATIONS: Efforts are needed to ensure that Medicaid recipients who desire sterilization receive timely services.

Voluntary sterilisation and access to IVF in Québec.

Bill 20, An Act to Enact the Act to promote access to family medicine and specialized medicine services and to amend various legislative provisions relating to assisted procreation, was introduced to reduce costs associated with Québec's healthcare in general and in vitro fertilisation (IVF) in particular. Passed in November 2015, the new law introduces a number of exclusion criteria for access to and funding for IVF treatment. Remarkably, one exclusion criterion-prior voluntary sterilisation-has prompted little critical commentary. The two justifications offered for restricting funding for IVF on the basis of voluntary sterilisation are that (1) there are cheaper options than IVF for sterilised individuals who want children, and (2) society should not have to pay for IVF for persons who are infertile by choice. I argue that both of these justifications are unsatisfactory, insofar as they contravene the chief value underlying, and current practices of, Canadian healthcare, and rely on problematic ascriptions of personal responsibility for health.

[Evaluation of practices and costs of vasectomy. French monocentric experience]. / Évaluation des pratiques et des coûts de la vasectomie. Expérience monocentrique française.

INTRODUCTION: Since the law of 4 July 2001, vasectomy has been recognized as a method of male contraception. We report the experience of vasectomy practice in a hospital-university center. METHODS: A monocentric retrospective cohort study of 45 patients who benefited from a contraceptive vasectomy between July 2001 and May 2016. For each patient were studied: modalities of implementation, compliance with the recommendations of the 2001 law, costs and benefits generated by the intervention, the effectiveness of the gesture on the control spermograms, the satisfaction of the patients by a telephone questionnaire. RESULTS: The mean age was 41.3 years. The second consultation was carried out in 91 % of the cases but the reflection period was not respected in 24 % of the cases. Written consent was signed in 89 % of cases. Vasectomy was performed on an outpatient basis in 73 % of cases, under local anaesthesia in 6.7 % of cases. The average cost per patient was 660.63 euros for an average gain of 524.50 euros, a loss of 136.13 euros. On the control spermogram, 54.3 % were azoosperms but the 3-month delay was not observed in 23 % of them. No patients expressed regret after surgery. CONCLUSION: The recommendations of the 2001 law were not systematically followed. This lack of standardization of practices, potential reflection of a lack of interest, is to be highlighted with the extra cost generated. The revaluation of the act should be integrated into the reflection of improvement of male sterilization practices. LEVEL OF PROOF: 4.

Characteristics of cats sterilized through a subsidized, reduced-cost spay-neuter program in Massachusetts and of owners who had cats sterilized through this program.

OBJECTIVE To determine characteristics of cats sterilized through a subsidized, reduced-cost spay-neuter program in Massachusetts and of owners who had their cats sterilized through this program. DESIGN Cross-sectional anonymous survey and telephone interviews. SAMPLE 1,188 (anonymous surveys) and 99 (telephone interviews) cat owners. PROCEDURES Owners who had a cat sterilized at clinics held between January 2006 and December 2008 were invited to complete anonymous surveys. Semistructured telephone interviews were conducted with owners who had a cat sterilized during clinics held in 2009. RESULTS Most cats had never been seen by a veterinarian previously; "too expensive" was the most common reason for this. Total annual household income was significantly associated with the number of times the cat had been examined by a veterinarian and reason why the cat had not been spayed or neutered previously. Most cats were acquired through informal means and without actively being sought, and there was often a time lag between acquisition and sterilization. Undesirable behavior and avoiding pregnancy were primary motivations for neutering and spaying, respectively. Nearly half of owners who indicated they would have had their cat sterilized through a private veterinarian if the clinic had not been available stated that the surgery would have been delayed because of cost. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE Findings suggested that spay-neuter decisions were related to owner income and procedure cost, that elimination of the reduced-cost spay-neuter program would likely have exacerbated the spay-delay problem, and that gradations of financial need should be considered when evaluating relationships between income and spay-neuter decisions.

Bringing men to the table: sterilization can be for him or for her.

Sterilization, male and female combined, is the most common use of contraception in the United States. Despite the lower risk, higher cost-efficacy, and high efficacy of vasectomy compared with female sterilization, more US women rely on female sterilization than male sterilization. Reasons for low use of vasectomy include lack of knowledge and misconceptions about the procedure, lack of access, provider bias, and patient preferences. This article will provide a basic overview of male and female sterilization, an exploration of vasectomy barriers, and ways obstetrician-gynecologists can increase vasectomy uptake including regular recommendation of vasectomy to patients in long-term committed relationships considering sterilization.

Dominance of sterilization and alternative choices of contraception in India: an appraisal of the socioeconomic impact.

BACKGROUND: The recent decline in fertility in India has been unprecedented especially in southern India, where fertility is almost exclusively controlled by means of permanent contraceptive methods, mainly female sterilization, which constitutes about two-thirds of overall contraceptive use. Many Indian women undergo sterilization at relatively young ages as a consequence of early marriage and childbearing in short birth intervals. This research aims to investigate the socioeconomic factors determining the choices for alternative contraceptive choices against the dominant preference for sterilization among married women in India. METHODS: Data for this study are drawn from the 2005-06 National Family Health Surveys focusing on a sample of married women who reported having used a method of contraception in the five years preceding the survey. A multilevel multinomial logit regression is used to estimate the impact of socioeconomic factors on contraceptive choices, differentiating temporary modern or traditional methods versus sterilization. FINDINGS: Religious affiliation, women's education and occupation had overarching influence on method choices amongst recent users. Muslim women were at higher odds of choosing a traditional or modern temporary method than sterilization. Higher level of women's education increased the odds of modern temporary method choices but the education effect on traditional method choices was only marginally significant. Recent users belonging to wealthier households had higher odds of choosing modern methods over sterilization. Exposure to family planning messages through radio had a positive effect on modern and traditional method choices. Community variations in method choices were highly significant. CONCLUSION: The persistent dominance of sterilization in the Indian family planning programme is largely determined by socioeconomic conditions. Reproductive health programmes should address the socioeconomic barriers and consider multiple cost-effective strategies such as mass media to promote awareness of modern temporary methods.

Reconsidering racial/ethnic differences in sterilization in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: Cross-sectional studies have found that low-income and racial/ethnic minority women are more likely to use female sterilization and less likely to rely on a partner's vasectomy than women with higher incomes and whites. However, studies of pregnant and postpartum women report that racial/ethnic minorities, particularly low-income minority women, face greater barriers in obtaining a sterilization than do whites and those with higher incomes. In this paper, we address this apparent contradiction by examining the likelihood a woman gets a sterilization following each delivery, which removes from the comparison any difference in the number of births she has experienced. STUDY DESIGN: Using the 2006-2010 National Survey of Family Growth, we fit multivariable-adjusted logistic and Cox regression models to estimate odds ratios and hazard ratios for getting a postpartum or interval sterilization, respectively, according to race/ethnicity and insurance status. RESULTS: Women's chances of obtaining a sterilization varied by both race/ethnicity and insurance. Among women with Medicaid, whites were more likely to use female sterilization than African Americans and Latinas. Privately insured whites were more likely to rely on vasectomy than African Americans and Latinas, but among women with Medicaid-paid deliveries reliance on vasectomy was low for all racial/ethnic groups. CONCLUSIONS: Low-income racial/ethnic minority women are less likely to undergo sterilization following delivery compared to low-income whites and privately insured women of similar parities. This could result from unique barriers to obtaining permanent contraception and could expose women to the risk of future unintended pregnancies. IMPLICATIONS: Low-income minorities are less likely to undergo sterilization than low-income whites and privately insured minorities, which may result from barriers to obtaining permanent contraception, and exposes women to unintended pregnancies.

Potential unintended pregnancies averted and cost savings associated with a revised Medicaid sterilization policy.

OBJECTIVE: Medicaid sterilization policy, which includes a mandatory 30-day waiting period between consent and the sterilization procedure, poses significant logistical barriers for many women who desire publicly funded sterilization. Our goal was to estimate the number of unintended pregnancies and the associated costs resulting from unfulfilled sterilization requests due to Medicaid policy barriers. STUDY DESIGN: We constructed a cost-effectiveness model from the health care payer perspective to determine the incremental cost over a 1-year time horizon of the current Medicaid sterilization policy compared to a hypothetical, revised policy in which women who desire a postpartum sterilization would face significantly reduced barriers. Probability estimates for potential outcomes in the model were based on published sources; costs of Medicaid-funded sterilizations and Medicaid-covered births were based on data from the Medicaid Statistical Information System and The Guttmacher Institute, respectively. RESULTS: With the implementation of a revised Medicaid sterilization policy, we estimated that the number of fulfilled sterilization requests would increase by 45%, from 53.3% of all women having their sterilization requests fulfilled to 77.5%. Annually, this increase could potentially lead to over 29,000 unintended pregnancies averted and $215 million saved. CONCLUSION: A revised Medicaid sterilization policy could potentially honor women's reproductive decisions, reduce the number of unintended pregnancies and save a significant amount of public funds. IMPLICATION: Compared to the current federal Medicaid sterilization policy, a hypothetical, revised policy that reduces logistical barriers for women who desire publicly funded, postpartum sterilization could potentially avert over 29,000 unintended pregnancies annually and therefore lead to cost savings of $215 million each year.

Control and constraint for low-income women choosing outpatient sterilization.

Little is known about Hispanics and their contraceptive choices in general, with some past studies detailing nonconsensual sterilization. This article is based on interviews with a mostly Hispanic sample of 44 women being sterilized at a public clinic in southeast Texas with the Essure device, which entails a new outpatient sterilization procedure. The women cited relationship factors, wanting to better their and their children's lives, and past reproductive histories as reasons for deciding on sterilization. They specifically chose Essure as a result of an apprehension of surgery and potential side effects from tubal ligation. Their choices, however, were limited by larger structural factors of work, family, the political economy, and the health care system. We concluded that this new sterilization technique provided more contraceptive choices for these women, yet more contraceptive decision-making autonomy and more equitable social structures are still needed.

Costs and benefits of trap-neuter-release and euthanasia for removal of urban cats in Oahu, Hawaii.

Our goal was to determine whether it is more cost-effective to control feral cat abundance with trap-neuter-release programs or trap and euthanize programs. Using STELLA 7, systems modeling software, we modeled changes over 30 years in abundance of cats in a feral colony in response to each management method and the costs and benefits associated with each method . We included costs associated with providing food, veterinary care, and microchips to the colony cats and the cost of euthanasia, wages, and trapping equipment in the model. Due to a lack of data on predation rates and disease transmission by feral cats the only benefits incorporated into the analyses were reduced predation on Wedge-tailed Shearwaters (Puffinus pacificus). When no additional domestic cats were abandoned by owners and the trap and euthanize program removed 30,000 cats in the first year, the colony was extirpated in at least 75% of model simulations within the second year. It took 30 years for trap-neuter-release to extirpate the colony. When the cat population was supplemented with 10% of the initial population size per year, the colony returned to carrying capacity within 6 years and the trap and euthanize program had to be repeated, whereas trap-neuter-release never reduced the number of cats to near zero within the 30-year time frame of the model. The abandonment of domestic cats reduced the cost effectiveness of both trap-neuter-release and trap and euthanize. Trap-neuter-release was approximately twice as expensive to implement as a trap and euthanize program. Results of sensitivity analyses suggested trap-neuter-release programs that employ volunteers are still less cost-effective than trap and euthanize programs that employ paid professionals and that trap-neuter-release was only effective when the total number of colony cats in an area was below 1000. Reducing the rate of abandonment of domestic cats appears to be a more effective solution for reducing the abundance of feral cats.

Trends in the use of female sterilisation through minilaparotomy for contraception at a teaching hospital in north central Nigeria.

BACKGROUND: Female sterilisation is the most widely used method of contraception worldwide. However, only a small proportion of contraceptors are reported to rely on female sterilisation in Nigeria. Continuous reviews of trends in its use are necessary to develop policies that will improve uptake in the country. OBJECTIVE: To determine the volume and trends in the use of female sterilisation through minilaparotomy as a method of contraception in a Nigerian university teaching hospital. METHODS: The records of women who had sterilisation through minilaparotomy over a ten year period were reviewed for socialdemographic characteristics, reasons for undergoing sterilisation, timing of the procedure, surgical method used and complications recorded. This is too sketchy RESULTS: Female sterilisation through minilaparotomy accounted for 95 (0.8%) of the 12,035 total contraceptive use during the period. The rate decreased from 1.5% of total contraceptive use in 1995 to 0.22% in 2003. Eighty two (86.4%) of the female sterilisation acceptors were aged 35 years and above, 46 (48.4%) had no or only primary education and 42 (44.2%) were petty traders. Sixty six (69.5%) of the women were grandmultiparae and 70 (73.7%) had more children than they desired. Seventy three (76.8%) had used other contraceptive methods before sterilisation. The average cost of female sterilisation through minilaparotomy in our hospital was USD25 and this was significantly more than the cost of other contraceptives, and more than hospital charges for normal vaginal delivery. CONCLUSION: The proportion of contraceptive acceptors who rely on female sterilisation is low in our environment and has steadily declined over the years. The higher cost of the procedure as compared to other contraceptives appears to be the main barrier. Reduction or outright elimination of cost will probably act as incentive for women to choose female sterilisation as a method of contraception.

Federally funded sterilization: time to rethink policy?

In the 1970s, concern about coercive sterilization of low-income and minority women in the United States led the US Department of Health, Education, and Welfare to create strict regulations for federally funded sterilization procedures. Although these policies were instituted to secure informed consent and protect women from involuntary sterilization, there are significant data indicating that these policies may not, in fact, ensure that consent is truly informed and, further, may prevent many low-income women from getting a desired sterilization procedure. Given the alarmingly high rates of unintended pregnancy in the United States, especially among low-income populations, we feel that restrictive federal sterilization policies should be reexamined and modified to simultaneously ensure informed decision-making and honor women's reproductive choices.

A fresh look at spay/neuter legislation: the journey to a middle ground.

A hybrid body of regulations is recommended containing both mandatory spay/neuter and low-cost spay/neuter provisions that will reduce accidental litters, impulse buying, and other irresponsible pet practices. The majority of pet owners are well-meaning but often lack the financial, intellectual, or other resources to properly control the breeding behaviors of their animals. Full compliance with spay/neuter regulations is the most desirable solution to the pet overpopulation problem. A comprehensive rule structure will facilitate spaying and neutering in some circumstances and require it on others.