Pre-exposure and postexposure prophylaxis access in rural versus urban pharmacies in Georgia and Pennsylvania.

BACKGROUND: Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) and postexposure prophylaxis (PEP) prevent HIV among individuals at high risk for acquisition. Pre-existing structural barriers to PrEP/PEP access among rural patients may be exacerbated further if pharmacies do not keep PrEP/PEP in stock, constituting a significant barrier to mitigating the HIV epidemic. OBJECTIVES: To compare PrEP/PEP availability for same-day pickup in rural vs urban Georgia and Pennsylvania pharmacies. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional simulated patient caller study, calling pharmacists in Georgia and Pennsylvania to see whether PrEP/PEP was available for same-day pickup. We identified retail pharmacies through state pharmacy boards and categorized rurality using state-based definitions. We used multivariable logistic regression to assess PrEP availability by rurality and Ending the HIV Epidemic (EHE) designation, accounting for chain pharmacy status and county-level racial composition. RESULTS: Among 481 pharmacies contacted (304 in Pennsylvania and 177 in Georgia), only 30.77% had PrEP for same-day pickup and only 10.55% had PEP for same-day pickup. PrEP availability did not differ significantly by state. Urban pharmacies had 2.02 (95% CI: 1.32-3.09) greater odds of PrEP same-day availability compared to rural pharmacies. Pharmacies in EHE counties had 3.45 (95% CI: 1.9-6.23) times higher odds of carrying PrEP compared to non-EHE counties. CONCLUSIONS: Pharmacies were unlikely to carry PrEP or PEP. Pharmacies in rural compared to urban, and non-EHE compared to EHE locations were less likely to carry PrEP. Addressing pharmacy barriers to PrEP/PEP may enhance access to HIV prevention for those living at high risk of HIV.

Approaching the Concepts of Gender and Sex in Family Planning Research.

Gender and sex are distinct constructs that shape family planning related experiences, outcomes, and opportunities. This commentary provides guidance to clinical and social science researchers on: 1) current definitions of gender and sex; 2) when and why capturing information about gender, sex, or both is relevant to family planning studies; 3) recommended language for each stage of the research process to accurately and affirmingly recruit participants, collect and analyze data, and disseminate findings; and 4) approaches for engaging with already collected data or published research. Failing to address gender and sex with clarity and intention in family planning research can lead to biased samples, biased instruments, and biased data, consequently limiting scholarly knowledge of family planning desires, abilities, experiences, outcomes, and preferences.

Contraceptive Use Among Traditional Medicare And Medicare Advantage Enrollees.

Medicare is the primary source of health insurance coverage for reproductive-age people with Social Security Disability Insurance. However, Medicare does not require contraceptive coverage for pregnancy prevention, and little is known about contraceptive use in traditional Medicare and Medicare Advantage. We analyzed Medicare and Optum data to assess variations in contraceptive use and methods used by traditional Medicare and Medicare Advantage enrollees, as well as among enrollees with and without noncontraceptive clinical indications. Clinically indicated contraceptives are used for reasons other than pregnancy prevention, including menstrual regulation or to treat acne, menorrhagia, and endometriosis. Contraceptive use was higher among Medicare Advantage enrollees than traditional Medicare enrollees, but use in both populations was low compared with contraceptive use among Medicaid enrollees. We found significant variation by Medicare type with respect to contraceptive methods used. Relative to traditional Medicare, the probability of long-acting reversible contraception was more than three times higher in Medicare Advantage, and the probability of tubal sterilization was more than ten times higher. Overall, Medicare enrollees with noncontraceptive clinical indications had twice the probability of contraceptive use as those without them. Medicare coverage of all contraceptive methods without cost sharing would help address financial barriers to contraceptives and support the reproductive autonomy of disabled enrollees.