Kaitlyn K Stanhope1,2, Michael R Kramer1. 1. 1371 Department of Epidemiology, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA. 2. Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Limited evidence suggests racial/ethnic disparities in postpartum visit attendance; however, little is known about patterns in postpartum visit content. We sought to determine whether receipt of screening and counseling varies by race/ethnicity and whether cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk (preconception or pregnancy related) predicts postpartum visit content. METHODS: We used data from the Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System 2016-2017 (39 sites) to calculate the prevalence of self-reported receipt of screening, services, and counseling at the postpartum visit by race/ethnicity and CVD risk (unweighted analytic sample n = 59 427). We created a score representing receipt of 5 key screenings or messages at the visit (counseling on healthy eating and exercise, cigarettes, pregnancy spacing, and birth control methods; screening for depression), which we used as a binary indicator of visit content in regression models. We fit a logistic regression model to determine the magnitude of association between CVD risk and receipt of the 5 key messages, prevention screening, or CVD-specific counseling (on healthy eating and exercise, smoking), adjusting for maternal age, race/ethnicity, and health insurance status. RESULTS: Overall, 40% of women reported receiving all CVD-specific prevention messages. Both prepregnancy and pregnancy-related CVD risk were associated with increased odds of receipt of CVD prevention messages (adjusted odds ratios [aOR] = 1.2; 95% CI, 1.1-1.3; and 1.1; 95% CI, 1.1-1.2, respectively). Race/ethnicity was a stronger predictor than CVD risk: non-Hispanic Black women were twice as likely as non-Hispanic White women to receive CVD prevention messages, regardless of CVD risk (aOR = 1.9; 95% CI, 1.7-2.0). CONCLUSIONS: Health systems should consider novel strategies to improve and standardize the content of postpartum visits.
OBJECTIVES: Limited evidence suggests racial/ethnic disparities in postpartum visit attendance; however, little is known about patterns in postpartum visit content. We sought to determine whether receipt of screening and counseling varies by race/ethnicity and whether cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk (preconception or pregnancy related) predicts postpartum visit content. METHODS: We used data from the Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System 2016-2017 (39 sites) to calculate the prevalence of self-reported receipt of screening, services, and counseling at the postpartum visit by race/ethnicity and CVD risk (unweighted analytic sample n = 59 427). We created a score representing receipt of 5 key screenings or messages at the visit (counseling on healthy eating and exercise, cigarettes, pregnancy spacing, and birth control methods; screening for depression), which we used as a binary indicator of visit content in regression models. We fit a logistic regression model to determine the magnitude of association between CVD risk and receipt of the 5 key messages, prevention screening, or CVD-specific counseling (on healthy eating and exercise, smoking), adjusting for maternal age, race/ethnicity, and health insurance status. RESULTS: Overall, 40% of women reported receiving all CVD-specific prevention messages. Both prepregnancy and pregnancy-related CVD risk were associated with increased odds of receipt of CVD prevention messages (adjusted odds ratios [aOR] = 1.2; 95% CI, 1.1-1.3; and 1.1; 95% CI, 1.1-1.2, respectively). Race/ethnicity was a stronger predictor than CVD risk: non-Hispanic Black women were twice as likely as non-Hispanic White women to receive CVD prevention messages, regardless of CVD risk (aOR = 1.9; 95% CI, 1.7-2.0). CONCLUSIONS: Health systems should consider novel strategies to improve and standardize the content of postpartum visits.
Entities:
Keywords:
PRAMS; cardiovascular disease prevention; health promotion; postpartum
Authors: A H Xiang; B H Li; M H Black; D A Sacks; T A Buchanan; S J Jacobsen; J M Lawrence Journal: Diabetologia Date: 2011-10-21 Impact factor: 10.122
Authors: Donald M Lloyd-Jones; Yuling Hong; Darwin Labarthe; Dariush Mozaffarian; Lawrence J Appel; Linda Van Horn; Kurt Greenlund; Stephen Daniels; Graham Nichol; Gordon F Tomaselli; Donna K Arnett; Gregg C Fonarow; P Michael Ho; Michael S Lauer; Frederick A Masoudi; Rose Marie Robertson; Véronique Roger; Lee H Schwamm; Paul Sorlie; Clyde W Yancy; Wayne D Rosamond Journal: Circulation Date: 2010-01-20 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Holly B Shulman; Denise V D'Angelo; Leslie Harrison; Ruben A Smith; Lee Warner Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2018-08-23 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Monica R McLemore; Molly R Altman; Norlissa Cooper; Shanell Williams; Larry Rand; Linda Franck Journal: Soc Sci Med Date: 2018-02-16 Impact factor: 4.634
Authors: Elizabeth A Howell; Haywood Brown; Jessica Brumley; Allison S Bryant; Aaron B Caughey; Andria M Cornell; Jacqueline H Grant; Kimberly D Gregory; Susan M Gullo; Katy B Kozhimannil; Jill M Mhyre; Paloma Toledo; Robyn D'Oria; Martha Ngoh; William A Grobman Journal: J Midwifery Womens Health Date: 2018-04-23 Impact factor: 2.388