Literature DB >> 29574095

Changes in uptake and cost of long-acting reversible contraceptive devices following the introduction of a new low-cost levonorgestrel IUD in Utah's Title X clinics: a retrospective review.

Lauryn P Roth1, Jessica N Sanders1, Rebecca G Simmons1, Holly Bullock1, Elizabeth Jacobson1, David K Turok2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The objective was to assess changes in long-acting reversible contraceptive (LARC) method uptake at Utah's Title X clinics before and after introduction of a new, low-cost levonorgestrel (LNG) 52mg IUD (Liletta®). STUDY
DESIGN: We conducted a retrospective medical record review of LARC visits occurring at seven Title-X family planning clinics in Utah before the introduction of the low-cost LNG IUD (preintroduction period: 01/01/2014-04/30/2015) and after (postintroduction period: 05/01/2015-03/31/2016). We ran segmented, interrupted time series ordinary least squares regression models using Newey-West standard errors to assess both the change in numbers of women initiating any LARC method and the average payment amount per LARC method. We evaluated both the low-cost LNG IUD and all LARC methods.
RESULTS: At the outset of preintroduction period, there were 29.2 [95% confidence interval (CI): 20.1-38.4] monthly LNG IUD insertions. Immediately postintroduction, there was a significant level of increase of 14.4 LNG IUD insertions the first month (95% CI: 2.0-26.8) followed by a significant trend increase each month of 2.4 additional LNG IUD insertions (95% CI: 0.32-4.47). Postintroduction, there was a significant level of remitted-payment decrease from all sources of -$240.43 per LNG IUD (95% CI: -311.02 to 168.87) followed by a significant monthly trend decrease of -$23.01 per LNG IUD (95% CI: -32.02 to -13.98). There were minimal changes in uptake and payment of other LARC methods following the introduction of the low-cost LNG IUD.
CONCLUSIONS: Following introduction of a low-cost LNG IUD at Title X clinics, LNG IUD initiation increased and average payment for the method decreased. IMPLICATIONS: Reducing the cost of LARC methods, both to clinics and to patients, is essential to expanding access. Additional efforts to develop and provide access to low-cost copper IUDs and subdermal implants as well as novel LARC methods should be continued.
Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Contraception; Cost; IUD; Intrauterine device; LNG IUD; Liletta®

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29574095      PMCID: PMC6207500          DOI: 10.1016/j.contraception.2018.03.029

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Contraception        ISSN: 0010-7824            Impact factor:   3.375


  19 in total

1.  A comparison of contraceptive procurement pre- and post-benefit change.

Authors:  Debbie Postlethwaite; James Trussell; Anthony Zoolakis; Ruth Shabear; Diana Petitti
Journal:  Contraception       Date:  2007-11       Impact factor: 3.375

2.  Three-year efficacy and safety of a new 52-mg levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system.

Authors:  David L Eisenberg; Courtney A Schreiber; David K Turok; Stephanie B Teal; Carolyn L Westhoff; Mitchell D Creinin
Journal:  Contraception       Date:  2015-04-28       Impact factor: 3.375

3.  Acceptance of long-acting reversible contraceptive methods by adolescent participants in the Contraceptive CHOICE Project.

Authors:  Renee Mestad; Gina Secura; Jenifer E Allsworth; Tessa Madden; Qiuhong Zhao; Jeffrey F Peipert
Journal:  Contraception       Date:  2011-04-27       Impact factor: 3.375

4.  ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 121: Long-acting reversible contraception: Implants and intrauterine devices.

Authors: 
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2011-07       Impact factor: 7.661

5.  Did increasing use of highly effective contraception contribute to declining abortions in Iowa?

Authors:  M A Biggs; C H Rocca; C D Brindis; H Hirsch; D Grossman
Journal:  Contraception       Date:  2014-11-04       Impact factor: 3.375

6.  A reanalysis of cluster randomized trials showed interrupted time-series studies were valuable in health system evaluation.

Authors:  Atle Fretheim; Fang Zhang; Dennis Ross-Degnan; Andrew D Oxman; Helen Cheyne; Robbie Foy; Steve Goodacre; Jeph Herrin; Ngaire Kerse; R James McKinlay; Adam Wright; Stephen B Soumerai
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2014-12-11       Impact factor: 6.437

7.  Accessibility of long-acting reversible contraceptives (LARCs) in Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs).

Authors:  Tishra Beeson; Susan Wood; Brian Bruen; Debora Goetz Goldberg; Holly Mead; Sara Rosenbaum
Journal:  Contraception       Date:  2013-10-01       Impact factor: 3.375

8.  The relationship between long-acting reversible contraception and insurance coverage: a retrospective analysis.

Authors:  Jane Broecker; Joan Jurich; Robin Fuchs
Journal:  Contraception       Date:  2015-11-11       Impact factor: 3.375

9.  Changes in Use of Long-Acting Reversible Contraceptive Methods Among U.S. Women, 2009-2012.

Authors:  Megan L Kavanaugh; Jenna Jerman; Lawrence B Finer
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2015-11       Impact factor: 7.661

10.  Interrupted time series regression for the evaluation of public health interventions: a tutorial.

Authors:  James Lopez Bernal; Steven Cummins; Antonio Gasparrini
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  2017-02-01       Impact factor: 7.196

View more
  5 in total

1.  Immediate Postpartum Long-Acting Reversible Contraception Programs in Texas Hospitals Following Changes to Medicaid Reimbursement Policy.

Authors:  Ashley V Hill; Eileen Nehme; Nagla Elerian; Ella D Puga; Brandie D Taylor; David Lakey; Divya A Patel
Journal:  Matern Child Health J       Date:  2019-12

2.  Abortion Surveillance - United States, 2018.

Authors:  Katherine Kortsmit; Tara C Jatlaoui; Michele G Mandel; Jennifer A Reeves; Titilope Oduyebo; Emily Petersen; Maura K Whiteman
Journal:  MMWR Surveill Summ       Date:  2020-11-27

3.  Abortion Surveillance - United States, 2019.

Authors:  Katherine Kortsmit; Michele G Mandel; Jennifer A Reeves; Elizabeth Clark; H Pamela Pagano; Antoinette Nguyen; Emily E Petersen; Maura K Whiteman
Journal:  MMWR Surveill Summ       Date:  2021-11-26

4.  Does access to no-cost contraception change method selection among individuals who report difficulty paying for health-related care?

Authors:  Alexandra Gero; Rebecca G Simmons; Jessica N Sanders; David K Turok
Journal:  BMC Womens Health       Date:  2022-08-02       Impact factor: 2.742

5.  Association between the use of free-of-charge intrauterine devices and a history of induced abortion: a retrospective study.

Authors:  Sabina Ulbricht; Angelika Beyer; Ulrich John
Journal:  BMC Womens Health       Date:  2019-10-18       Impact factor: 2.809

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.