Henan Li1, Monika Mitra, Justine P Wu, Susan L Parish, Anne Valentine, Robert S Dembo. 1. Lurie Institute for Disability Policy, Brandeis University, Waltham, and the Human Services Research Institute, Cambridge, Massachusetts; the Department of Family Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan; and the Bouvé College of Health Sciences, Northeastern University, Boston, Massachusetts.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare female sterilization among three mutually exclusive groups of females: 1) those without any self-reported disability, 2) those with noncognitive disabilities (sensory or physical disabilities), and 3) those with cognitive disabilities. METHODS: We conducted a secondary analysis of nationally representative data from the National Survey of Family Growth 2011-2015, which surveyed individuals aged 15-44 years in the U.S. civilian population. Disability status (self-reported) was ascertained using a standard set of questions about hearing, vision, cognitive, ambulatory, self-care, and independent living difficulties. Regression models were used to calculate odds of female sterilization, hysterectomies, and age of sterilization while accounting for sociodemographic differences. RESULTS: Female sterilization rates were higher among females with cognitive (22.1% [n=272]) and noncognitive disabilities (24.7% [n=150]) than among those without disabilities (14.8% [n=1,132]). After adjusting for sociodemographic covariates, females with cognitive disabilities had significantly higher odds of female sterilization (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.54, 95% CI 1.19-1.98, P<.01) and hysterectomy (adjusted OR 2.64, 95% CI 1.53-4.56, P<.001) than those without cognitive disabilities. Females with cognitive disabilities also underwent sterilization at significantly younger ages (27.3 years, 95% CI 27.0-27.6) than those with noncognitive disabilities (28.3 years, 95% CI 27.9-28.8) and those without any disability (29.8 years, 95% CI 29.5-30.0). CONCLUSION: U.S. females with cognitive disabilities were more likely to have undergone female sterilizations and hysterectomies and at younger ages than those with other disabilities or without disabilities. Drivers of these disability-related differences in female sterilization patterns must be explored.
OBJECTIVE: To compare female sterilization among three mutually exclusive groups of females: 1) those without any self-reported disability, 2) those with noncognitive disabilities (sensory or physical disabilities), and 3) those with cognitive disabilities. METHODS: We conducted a secondary analysis of nationally representative data from the National Survey of Family Growth 2011-2015, which surveyed individuals aged 15-44 years in the U.S. civilian population. Disability status (self-reported) was ascertained using a standard set of questions about hearing, vision, cognitive, ambulatory, self-care, and independent living difficulties. Regression models were used to calculate odds of female sterilization, hysterectomies, and age of sterilization while accounting for sociodemographic differences. RESULTS: Female sterilization rates were higher among females with cognitive (22.1% [n=272]) and noncognitive disabilities (24.7% [n=150]) than among those without disabilities (14.8% [n=1,132]). After adjusting for sociodemographic covariates, females with cognitive disabilities had significantly higher odds of female sterilization (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.54, 95% CI 1.19-1.98, P<.01) and hysterectomy (adjusted OR 2.64, 95% CI 1.53-4.56, P<.001) than those without cognitive disabilities. Females with cognitive disabilities also underwent sterilization at significantly younger ages (27.3 years, 95% CI 27.0-27.6) than those with noncognitive disabilities (28.3 years, 95% CI 27.9-28.8) and those without any disability (29.8 years, 95% CI 29.5-30.0). CONCLUSION: U.S. females with cognitive disabilities were more likely to have undergone female sterilizations and hysterectomies and at younger ages than those with other disabilities or without disabilities. Drivers of these disability-related differences in female sterilization patterns must be explored.
Authors: Sonya Borrero; Eleanor B Schwarz; Matthew F Reeves; James E Bost; Mitchell D Creinin; Said A Ibrahim Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2007-01 Impact factor: 7.661
Authors: Justine P Wu; Michael M McKee; Kimberly S Mckee; Michelle A Meade; Melissa Plegue; Ananda Sen Journal: Disabil Health J Date: 2017-01-03 Impact factor: 2.554
Authors: Sonya Borrero; Eleanor B Schwarz; Matthew F Reeves; James E Bost; Mitchell D Creinin; Said A Ibrahim Journal: Fertil Steril Date: 2008-04-03 Impact factor: 7.329