David Sheyn1, Kavita Shah Arora2. 1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, MetroHealth Medical Center, 2500 MetroHealth Drive, Cleveland, OH, 44109, USA. 2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, MetroHealth Medical Center, 2500 MetroHealth Drive, Cleveland, OH, 44109, USA. Kavita.Shah.Arora@gmail.com.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To examine recent rates of long-acting and permanent methods (LAPM) of contraception use during delivery hospitalization and correlates of their use. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study utilizing the 2012-2016 National Inpatient Sample of hospitalizations in the United States of America. The International Classification of Diseases, 9th and 10th Revision, Clinical Modification codes were used to identify deliveries, inpatient long-acting reversible contraception (IPP LARC), and postpartum tubal ligation (PPTL). We conducted univariable and multivariable logistic regression to examine associations between demographic, clinical, hospital and geographical characteristics with likelihood of LAPM including IPP LARC and PPTL. RESULTS: Our sample included 3,642,328 unweighted deliveries. The rate of IPP LARC increased from 34.6 to 54.9 per 10,000 deliveries (58.7%), while the rate of PPTL utilization decreased from 719.5 to 671.8 per 10,000 deliveries (6.6%) over the study period. In multivariable analysis of LAPM utilization versus neither, cesarean delivery (aOR 7.25, 95% CI 7.08-7.43) was associated with greater utilization. Native American (aOR 4.01, 95% CI 2.91-5.53) race was associated with increased use of IPP LARC compared to a non-long-acting method of contraception. Age between 18 and 29 years (aOR 6.21, 95% CI 5.42-7.11) was associated with greater use of IPP LARC versus PPTL. Delivering in a rural hospital ((aOR 0.09, 95% CI 0.06-0.12) and cesarean delivery (aOR 0.09, 95% CI 0.06-0.12) were associated with greater use PPTL versus IPP LARC. CONCLUSIONS: The IPP LARC rate remains at less than 10% the PPTL rates in our study timeframe. The demonstrated variation in uptake of highly effective methods of contraception inpatient after delivery offer possible opportunities for better understanding and improvement in access.
OBJECTIVES: To examine recent rates of long-acting and permanent methods (LAPM) of contraception use during delivery hospitalization and correlates of their use. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study utilizing the 2012-2016 National Inpatient Sample of hospitalizations in the United States of America. The International Classification of Diseases, 9th and 10th Revision, Clinical Modification codes were used to identify deliveries, inpatient long-acting reversible contraception (IPP LARC), and postpartum tubal ligation (PPTL). We conducted univariable and multivariable logistic regression to examine associations between demographic, clinical, hospital and geographical characteristics with likelihood of LAPM including IPP LARC and PPTL. RESULTS: Our sample included 3,642,328 unweighted deliveries. The rate of IPP LARC increased from 34.6 to 54.9 per 10,000 deliveries (58.7%), while the rate of PPTL utilization decreased from 719.5 to 671.8 per 10,000 deliveries (6.6%) over the study period. In multivariable analysis of LAPM utilization versus neither, cesarean delivery (aOR 7.25, 95% CI 7.08-7.43) was associated with greater utilization. Native American (aOR 4.01, 95% CI 2.91-5.53) race was associated with increased use of IPP LARC compared to a non-long-acting method of contraception. Age between 18 and 29 years (aOR 6.21, 95% CI 5.42-7.11) was associated with greater use of IPP LARC versus PPTL. Delivering in a rural hospital ((aOR 0.09, 95% CI 0.06-0.12) and cesarean delivery (aOR 0.09, 95% CI 0.06-0.12) were associated with greater use PPTL versus IPP LARC. CONCLUSIONS: The IPP LARC rate remains at less than 10% the PPTL rates in our study timeframe. The demonstrated variation in uptake of highly effective methods of contraception inpatient after delivery offer possible opportunities for better understanding and improvement in access.
Authors: Vid Janša; Isaac Blickstein; Miha Lučovnik; Vesna Fabjan-Vodušek; Ivan Verdenik; Nataša Tul Journal: J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med Date: 2017-04-11