OBJECTIVE: To assess long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) beliefs and practices among site directors who represent the family planning services delivered in their practices. METHODS: Medical directors from 1,000 sites listed in the Family Planning Access Care and Treatment program (California's family planning Medicaid program) provider database were mailed a survey in the fall of 2011 regarding their LARC beliefs and practices. Participants responded by mail, online, or telephone. Data on family planning clients served and LARC dispensing were obtained from administrative claims data. All analyses were limited to advanced practice clinician respondents. General estimating equation models identified the respondent and practice characteristics associated with LARC provision. RESULTS: After three follow-up mailings and telephone calls, 68% of eligible sites responded to the survey (636/939). Most respondents were physicians (448/587). They were most likely to consider women with a history of pelvic inflammatory disease unsuitable for hormonal (27%, n=161) and copper (26%, n=154) intrauterine devices. Smokers were the most likely to be considered unsuitable for the implant (16%, n=96). Nearly three fourths of respondents routinely discussed intrauterine devices (413/561) and half (271/558) discussed implants with their contraceptive patients. Characteristics that predicted onsite LARC provision included LARC training, beliefs, and health care provider type. CONCLUSION: Although there has been significant progress in expanding access and understanding about LARC, many clinicians from sites offering family planning services held beliefs limiting the provision of intrauterine devices and were unfamiliar with the implant, suggesting the need for targeted trainings aimed at informing clinicians of recent developments in LARC recommendations.
OBJECTIVE: To assess long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) beliefs and practices among site directors who represent the family planning services delivered in their practices. METHODS: Medical directors from 1,000 sites listed in the Family Planning Access Care and Treatment program (California's family planning Medicaid program) provider database were mailed a survey in the fall of 2011 regarding their LARC beliefs and practices. Participants responded by mail, online, or telephone. Data on family planning clients served and LARC dispensing were obtained from administrative claims data. All analyses were limited to advanced practice clinician respondents. General estimating equation models identified the respondent and practice characteristics associated with LARC provision. RESULTS: After three follow-up mailings and telephone calls, 68% of eligible sites responded to the survey (636/939). Most respondents were physicians (448/587). They were most likely to consider women with a history of pelvic inflammatory disease unsuitable for hormonal (27%, n=161) and copper (26%, n=154) intrauterine devices. Smokers were the most likely to be considered unsuitable for the implant (16%, n=96). Nearly three fourths of respondents routinely discussed intrauterine devices (413/561) and half (271/558) discussed implants with their contraceptive patients. Characteristics that predicted onsite LARC provision included LARC training, beliefs, and health care provider type. CONCLUSION: Although there has been significant progress in expanding access and understanding about LARC, many clinicians from sites offering family planning services held beliefs limiting the provision of intrauterine devices and were unfamiliar with the implant, suggesting the need for targeted trainings aimed at informing clinicians of recent developments in LARC recommendations.
Authors: Kirsten M J Thompson; Corinne H Rocca; Lisa Stern; Johanna Morfesis; Suzan Goodman; Jody Steinauer; Cynthia C Harper Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2018-03-23 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: Joseph E Potter; Kate Coleman-Minahan; Kari White; Daniel A Powers; Chloe Dillaway; Amanda J Stevenson; Kristine Hopkins; Daniel Grossman Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2017-08 Impact factor: 7.661
Authors: Sonya Borrero; Lisa S Callegari; Xinhua Zhao; Maria K Mor; Florentina E Sileanu; Galen Switzer; Susan Zickmund; Donna L Washington; Laurie C Zephyrin; E Bimla Schwarz Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2017-04-21 Impact factor: 5.128