Contraceptive Method Use Among a Population-Based Cohort During the South Carolina Choose Well Initiative.

Importance: Evaluating the impact of statewide contraceptive access initiatives is necessary for informing health policy and practice. Objective: To examine changes in contraceptive method use among a cohort of women of reproductive age in South Carolina during the Choose Well contraceptive access initiative. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cohort study, baseline data from the initial Statewide Survey of Women administered from October 1, 2017, to April 30, 2018, to a probability-based sample of women of reproductive age in South Carolina and a peer state (Alabama) were linked with 3 follow-up surveys given in 2019, 2020, and 2021. Responses about contraception use from the initial survey were compared with responses across follow-up surveys using the regression-based differences-in-differences method. Data analysis was performed from October 2023 to February 2024. Exposure: The South Carolina Choose Well contraceptive access initiative seeks to fill contraceptive access gaps and increase provision of a full range of contraceptive methods through engagement with a wide range of health care organizations across the state. Main Outcomes and Measures: Changes in contraceptive method use, including long-acting reversible contraception (LARC), intrauterine devices (IUDs), implants, short-acting hormonal injection, and barrier or other methods between the baseline survey (2017-2018) and 3 subsequent surveys (2019-2021). Results: A total of 1344 female participants (mean [SD] age, 34 [7] years) completed the first survey (667 in Alabama and 677 in South Carolina). Use of LARC significantly increased in South Carolina (119 [17.6%] to 138 [21.1%]) compared with Alabama (120 [18.0%] to 116 [18.1%]; P = .004). Use of IUDs increased in South Carolina (95 [14.0%] to 114 [17.4%]) compared with Alabama (92 [13.8%] to 102 [15.9%]; P = .003). These associations persisted in the adjusted analysis, with a significant increase in the odds of LARC (adjusted odds ratio, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.06-1.44) and IUD (adjusted odds ratio, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.06-1.32) use at follow-up in South Carolina compared with Alabama. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study of 1344 participants, increases in the use of IUDs in South Carolina were noted after the implementation of the South Carolina Choose Well initiative that were not observed in a peer state with no intervention. Our findings may provide support in favor of statewide contraceptive access initiatives and their role in promoting access to reproductive health services.

Impact of the Choose Well Initiative on Contraceptive Access at Federally Qualified Health Centers in South Carolina: A Midline Evaluation.

Choose Well (CW) is a statewide contraceptive access initiative to reduce unintended pregnancy among patients utilizing federally funded family planning services. We examined CW's impact on contraceptive access at South Carolina federally qualified health centers from 2016 to 2019, which reported significantly higher increases in providing the full range of contraceptive methods and training onsite. CW prioritized ensuring change sustainability through obtaining funding and institutionalizing changes. (Am J Public Health. 2023;113(11):1167-1172. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2023.307384).

Increases in IUD Provision at Alabama Department of Public Health Clinics From 2016 to 2019.

The Alabama Department of Public Health (ADPH) began allocating Title X funding to intrauterine device (IUD) provision at family planning clinics in 2019, instated more training opportunities, and expanded nurse practitioner scope of practice to include IUD placements. We assessed IUD provision and protocols at ADPH Title X clinics in 2016 and 2019 before and after ADPH policy changes. Generalized binomial regression models assessed differences between years. The proportion of ADPH clinics reporting offering any IUD on-site increased by 61.6 percentage points ( P < .001), stockpiling IUDs on-site increased by 85.9 percentage points ( P < .001), IUD placement/removal training increased by 71.4 percentage points ( P < .001), and same-visit IUD placement trainings increased by 64.1 percentage points ( P < .001). Advanced practice nurses were significantly more likely to place IUDs in 2019 compared with 2016 ( P < .001). These findings highlight the positive impact of policy changes related to Title X funding allocation and scope of practice on provision of a full range of contraceptive methods. These changes in policies and practices at the state and local levels within ADPH have expanded the availability of the full range of contraceptive options across the state of Alabama. This expanded access to contraceptive options is especially important given the rapid changes in reproductive health policies occurring in Alabama and across the United States.

Contraceptive care service provision via telehealth early in the COVID-19 pandemic at rural and urban federally qualified health centers in 2 southeastern states.

PURPOSE: To investigate telehealth use for contraceptive service provision among rural and urban federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) in Alabama (AL) and South Carolina (SC) during the initial months of the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: This is a mixed-methods study using data from the FQHC Contraceptive Care Survey and key informant interviews with FQHC staff in AL and SC conducted in 2020. Differences between rural and urban clinics in telehealth use for contraceptive service provision were assessed with a chi-square test of independence. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed, and coded to identify facilitators and barriers to telehealth. FINDINGS: Telehealth for contraceptive care increased during the early months of the pandemic relative to prepandemic. Fewer rural clinics than urban clinics provided telehealth for contraceptive counseling (16.3% vs 50.6%) (P = .0002), emergency contraception (0.0% vs 16.1%) (P = .004), and sexually transmitted infection care (16.3% vs 34.6%) (P = .031). Key facilitators of telehealth were reimbursement policy, electronic infrastructure and technology, and funding for technology. Barriers included challenges with funding for telehealth, limited electronic infrastructure, and reduced staffing capacity. CONCLUSIONS: Differences in telehealth service provision for contraceptive care between rural and urban FQHCs highlight the need for supportive strategies to increase access to care for low-income rural populations, particularly in AL and SC. It is essential for public and private entities to support the implementation and continuation of telehealth among rural clinics, particularly, investing in widespread and clinic-level electronic infrastructure and technology for telehealth, such as broadband and electronic health record systems compatible with telehealth technology.

Telehealth for Contraceptive Care During the Initial Months of the COVID-19 Pandemic at Local Health Departments in 2 US States: A Mixed-Methods Approach.

OBJECTIVES: This study examined implementation of telehealth for contraceptive care among health departments (HDs) in 2 Southern US states with centralized/largely centralized governance structures during the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. Sustaining access to contraceptive care for underserved communities during public health emergencies is critical. Identifying facilitators and barriers to adaptive service provision helps inform state-level decision making and has implications for public health policy and practice, particularly in states with centralized HD governance. DESIGN: Mixed-methods study including a survey of HD clinic administrators and key informant interviews with clinic- and system-level staff in 2 states conducted in 2020. SETTING: Health department clinics in 2 Southern US states. PARTICIPANTS: Clinic administrators (survey) and clinic- and system-level respondents (key informant interviews). Participation in the research was voluntary and de-identified. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: (1) Telehealth implementation for contraceptive care assessed by survey and measured by the percentage of clinics reporting telehealth service provision during the pandemic; and (2) facilitators and barriers to telehealth implementation for contraceptive care assessed by key informant interviews. For survey data, bivariate differences between the states in telehealth implementation for contraceptive care were assessed using χ2 and Fisher exact tests. Interview transcripts were coded, with emphasis on interrater reliability and consensus coding, and analyzed for emerging themes. RESULTS: A majority of HD clinics in both states (60% in state 1 and 81% in state 2) reported a decrease in contraceptive care patient volume during March-June 2020 compared with the average volume in 2019. More HD clinics in state 1 than in state 2 implemented telehealth for contraceptive services, including contraceptive counseling, initial and refill hormonal contraception, emergency contraception and sexually transmitted infection care, and reported facilitators of telehealth. Medicaid reimbursement was a predominant facilitator of telehealth, whereas lack of implementation policies and procedures and reduced staffing capacity were predominant barriers. Electronic infrastructure and technology also played a role. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of telehealth for contraceptive services varied between state HD agencies in the early phase of the pandemic. Medicaid reimbursement policy and directives from HD agency leadership are key to telehealth service provision among HDs in centralized states.