Colleen P Judge-Golden1,2, Harold C Wiesenfeld3,4, Beatrice A Chen2,3,4, Sonya Borrero2,5,6. 1. University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA. 2. Center for Women's Health Research and Innovation, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA. 3. Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA. 4. Magee-Womens Research Institute, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA. 5. Center for Research on Health Care, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA. 6. Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, VA Pittsburgh Health Care System, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.
Abstract
Background: There is little research examining adherence to practice guidelines for long-acting reversible contraception (LARC). We assessed same-day LARC provision and adherence to other guideline-recommended practices among providers in a large academic health care system. Materials and Methods: We surveyed 363 providers who had billed using LARC-related codes within the prior 12 months. Primary outcomes were, for women requesting an intrauterine device (IUD) or implant, the typical number of visits for method provision and ability to add an insertion procedure to an annual examination. We used chi-square tests and multivariable logistic regression to identify characteristics associated with primary outcomes and described other practices and barriers to same-day LARC. Results: Our response rate was 42% (153/363). A typical single visit for women requesting an IUD or implant was reported by 37% of IUD providers and 51% of implant providers, respectively, and was associated with obstetrician-gynecologist specialty versus family medicine (IUD: 44% vs. 12%, p = 0.001; implant: 57% vs. 26%, p = 0.002) and practicing in the county of the main academic medical center versus any other county (IUD: 48% vs. 20%, p = 0.001; implant: 65% vs. 27%, p < 0.001). High ability to add LARC insertion to an annual examination was reported by 48% of IUD providers and 51% of implant providers, with similar associations of specialty and county. Barriers to same-day LARC included scheduling constraints, insurance and billing concerns, and device stocking. Nearly all respondents provide LARC to nulliparous women and adolescents. Among IUD providers, 73% schedule routine follow-up after insertion. Conclusions: Same-day LARC provision is low among providers in a large academic health care system. Provider-identified barriers suggest interventions to improve LARC access, including incentivizing device stocking and billing and insurance education.
Background: There is little research examining adherence to practice guidelines for long-acting reversible contraception (LARC). We assessed same-day LARC provision and adherence to other guideline-recommended practices among providers in a large academic health care system. Materials and Methods: We surveyed 363 providers who had billed using LARC-related codes within the prior 12 months. Primary outcomes were, for women requesting an intrauterine device (IUD) or implant, the typical number of visits for method provision and ability to add an insertion procedure to an annual examination. We used chi-square tests and multivariable logistic regression to identify characteristics associated with primary outcomes and described other practices and barriers to same-day LARC. Results: Our response rate was 42% (153/363). A typical single visit for women requesting an IUD or implant was reported by 37% of IUD providers and 51% of implant providers, respectively, and was associated with obstetrician-gynecologist specialty versus family medicine (IUD: 44% vs. 12%, p = 0.001; implant: 57% vs. 26%, p = 0.002) and practicing in the county of the main academic medical center versus any other county (IUD: 48% vs. 20%, p = 0.001; implant: 65% vs. 27%, p < 0.001). High ability to add LARC insertion to an annual examination was reported by 48% of IUD providers and 51% of implant providers, with similar associations of specialty and county. Barriers to same-day LARC included scheduling constraints, insurance and billing concerns, and device stocking. Nearly all respondents provide LARC to nulliparous women and adolescents. Among IUD providers, 73% schedule routine follow-up after insertion. Conclusions: Same-day LARC provision is low among providers in a large academic health care system. Provider-identified barriers suggest interventions to improve LARC access, including incentivizing device stocking and billing and insurance education.
Entities:
Keywords:
IUD; LARC; best practices; contraceptive implant; same-day
Authors: Radwa Rasheedy; Tarek Fathi Tamara; Ihab Serag Allam; Ahmed Mohamed Abbas; Nermine Essam El-Din Abd El Salam; Ahmed Ferhad Ahmed Journal: Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care Date: 2019-05-21 Impact factor: 1.848
Authors: Crystal P Tyler; Maura K Whiteman; Lauren B Zapata; Kathryn M Curtis; Susan D Hillis; Polly A Marchbanks Journal: Obstet Gynecol Date: 2012-04 Impact factor: 7.661
Authors: Kathryn M Curtis; Tara C Jatlaoui; Naomi K Tepper; Lauren B Zapata; Leah G Horton; Denise J Jamieson; Maura K Whiteman Journal: MMWR Recomm Rep Date: 2016-07-29