Dataset Information

Providing Family Planning Services at Primary Care Organizations after the Exclusion of Planned Parenthood from Publicly Funded Programs in Texas: Early Qualitative Evidence.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE:To explore organizations' experiences providing family planning during the first year of an expanded primary care program in Texas. DATA SOURCES:Between November 2014 and February 2015, in-depth interviews were conducted with program administrators at 30 organizations: 7 women's health organizations, 13 established primary care contractors (e.g., community health centers, public health departments), and 10 new primary care contractors. STUDY DESIGN:Interviews addressed organizational capacities to expand family planning and integrate services with primary care. DATA EXTRACTION:Interview transcripts were analyzed using a theme-based approach. Themes were compared across the three types of organizations. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS:Established and new primary care contractors identified several challenges expanding family planning services, which were uncommon among women's health organizations. Clinicians often lacked training to provide intrauterine devices and contraceptive implants. Organizations often recruited existing clients into family planning services, rather than expanding their patient base, and new contractors found family planning difficult to integrate because of clients' other health needs. Primary care contractors frequently described contraceptive provision protocols that were not evidence-based. CONCLUSIONS:Many primary care organizations in Texas initially lacked the capacity to provide evidence-based family planning services that women's health organizations already provided.

SUBMITTER: White K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6056580 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Providing Family Planning Services at Primary Care Organizations after the Exclusion of Planned Parenthood from Publicly Funded Programs in Texas: Early Qualitative Evidence.

White Kari K Hopkins Kristine K Grossman Daniel D Potter Joseph E JE

Health services research 20171020

<h4>Objective</h4>To explore organizations' experiences providing family planning during the first year of an expanded primary care program in Texas.<h4>Data sources</h4>Between November 2014 and February 2015, in-depth interviews were conducted with program administrators at 30 organizations: 7 women's health organizations, 13 established primary care contractors (e.g., community health centers, public health departments), and 10 new primary care contractors.<h4>Study design</h4>Interviews addr ...[more]

PMID: 29053179

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate how the availability of contraceptive services was associated with a change in the abortion rate before and after Texas' legislative changes to the family planning budget in 2011 and abortion access in 2013.MethodsIn this cross-sectional study, we obtained 2010 and 2015 data on contraceptive provision (number of publicly funded clinics and number of contraceptive clients served per 1,000 reproductive-aged women) from the Guttmacher Institute and county-level abortion data from the Texas Department of State Health Services. We categorized counties as having an abortion rate that increased or declined less than the national rate between 2010 and 2015 ( low-decline counties ) compared with those having an abortion rate that declined equal to or greater than the national rate between 2010 and 2015 ( high-decline counties ). We evaluated differences in contraceptive provision between high-decline and low-decline counties and evaluated county characteristics (racial and ethnic composition, unemployment, poverty, uninsured, education, distance to an abortion clinic, deliveries covered by Medicaid, and Catholic hospital marketplace dominance) as potential confounders.ResultsOf 157 counties that had at least one contraceptive clinic in either 2010 or 2015, 49 were low-decline counties and 108 were high-decline counties. Although the total number of publicly funded family planning clinics increased by 10.8%, there was a 4.7% decrease in the total number of contraceptive clients served statewide. Compared with low-decline counties, high-decline counties had a higher median number of contraceptive clients served per 1,000 women aged 18-44 years (31.9 vs 60.7, P <.05) in 2015. Between 2010 and 2015, the abortion rate decreased 19.7% for each 1.0% increase in contraceptive clients served.ConclusionTexas counties with higher abortion-rate declines had more publicly funded contraceptive clinics and served more contraceptive clients than counties with lower declines, which may indicate the importance of greater access to publicly funded contraceptive services.

Project description:BackgroundReaching and maintaining high global human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine uptake has been challenging. The impact of publicly funded HPV immunization programs and the interplay of sociodemographic, psychosocial and policy factors in maximizing vaccination is poorly understood. This observational study examined the impact of introducing publicly funded school-based HPV vaccination programs for boys directly on uptake in boys and indirectly on uptake in girls, while concurrently examining other important sociodemographic and psychosocial factors.MethodsData were collected from a national, longitudinal sample of Canadian parents of children aged 9-16 years during August-September 2016 (T1) and June-July 2017 (T2). Participants completed an online questionnaire measuring sociodemographic characteristics, vaccine knowledge and attitudes, health care provider recommendation, and HPV vaccine uptake. Analyses were conducted separately for parents of boys and girls using logistic regression analyses at T1 and T2. Jurisdictions with HPV vaccine funding for boys at both time-points were compared to those with funding at neither time-points and those that introduced funding between time-points.FindingsThe sample included parents of boys (n = 716) and girls (n = 843). In multivariable analyses, jurisdictions with funding for boys at both time-points had higher odds of vaccination (adjusted odds ratio, T1 = 10.18, T2 = 11.42; 95% confidence interval, T1 = 3.08-33.58, T2 = 5.61-23.23) than jurisdictions without funding at both time-points; however, funded jurisdictions did not have higher odds of vaccination compared to jurisdictions that newly introduced funding for boys. Vaccination was associated with consistent determinants in boys and girls including child's age, health care provider recommendation, perceived vaccine harms, and perceived vaccine affordability.InterpretationThis gender-sensitive analysis highlights the interplay of sociodemographic, psychosocial, and policy factors that can improve HPV vaccination. Publicly funded school-based programs are an impactful strategy to increase vaccine uptake.FundingThis work was supported by the Canadian Cancer Society Research Institute (#704,036). GKS was supported by the Vanier Canada Graduate Scholarship and Queen Elizabeth II Diamond Jubilee Scholarship programs. The funders of this work had no role in the data collection, analysis, or interpretation, or any aspect pertinent to the study.

Project description:ImportanceIn May 2019, new federal regulations regarding Title X funding were introduced. There has been no formal evaluation of the impact of this regulatory shift as it pertains to minors' access to services.ObjectiveTo explore the geography of federally funded clinics providing confidential reproductive care to adolescents following changes to Title X funding regulations.Design, setting, and participantsThis retrospective cross-sectional study used a population-based sample of US Census tracts. All clinics participating in the Title X program in August 2018 and August 2020 were included in the analysis. Data were analyzed from January to December 2021.ExposuresPeriod, defined as before and after the 2019 Title X rule change (August 2018 and August 2020, respectively).Main outcomes and measuresUS Census tracts were evaluated for the availability of confidential family planning care within a 30-minute drive, according to the presence of a Title X clinic or a permissive state law. Census tracts in which minors lost access to confidential care after the rule change were characterized in terms of demographic characteristics. Univariate logistic regression evaluated associations between Census tract characteristics and the odds of losing vs maintaining access to legally protected confidential minor services.ResultsThe study included 72 620 Census tracts, accounting for approximately 324 697 728 US residents (99.96% of the population). After the Title X rule change, 1743 clinics in the Title X program left (39.0%) and minors living in 6299 Census tracts (8.7%) lost access to confidential family planning care, corresponding to an estimated 933 649 youth aged 15 to 17 years. Minors living in rural Census tracts (odds ratio [OR], 1.27; 95% CI, 1.18-1.36) and those in the Midwest (OR, 2.41; 95% CI, 2.24-2.60) had higher odds of losing access to care. Minors living in Census tracts with a higher Social Vulnerability Index (OR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.47-0.55), a larger proportion of Black individuals (OR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.31-0.37), and/or a larger proportion of Hispanic individuals (OR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.42-0.49) were less likely to lose access to care.Conclusions and relevanceThese findings suggest that there were losses in access to legally protected confidential reproductive health services for youth after the 2019 Title X rule change. Although evidence-based Title X guidelines have since been reinstated, state laws that ensure adolescent confidentiality in obtaining family planning services may protect youth from future alterations to the Title X program.

Project description:UnlabelledPolicy Points: The US publicly supported family planning effort serves millions of women and men each year, and this analysis provides new estimates of its positive impact on a wide range of health outcomes and its net savings to the government. The public investment in family planning programs and providers not only helps women and couples avoid unintended pregnancy and abortion, but also helps many thousands avoid cervical cancer, HIV and other sexually transmitted infections, infertility, and preterm and low birth weight births. This investment resulted in net government savings of $13.6 billion in 2010, or $7.09 for every public dollar spent.ContextEach year the United States' publicly supported family planning program serves millions of low-income women. Although the health impact and public-sector savings associated with this program's services extend well beyond preventing unintended pregnancy, they never have been fully quantified.MethodsDrawing on an array of survey data and published parameters, we estimated the direct national-level and state-level health benefits that accrued from providing contraceptives, tests for the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and other sexually transmitted infections (STIs), Pap tests and tests for human papillomavirus (HPV), and HPV vaccinations at publicly supported family planning settings in 2010. We estimated the public cost savings attributable to these services and compared those with the cost of publicly funded family planning services in 2010 to find the net public-sector savings. We adjusted our estimates of the cost savings for unplanned births to exclude some mistimed births that would remain publicly funded if they had occurred later and to include the medical costs for births through age 5 of the child.FindingsIn 2010, care provided during publicly supported family planning visits averted an estimated 2.2 million unintended pregnancies, including 287,500 closely spaced and 164,190 preterm or low birth weight (LBW) births, 99,100 cases of chlamydia, 16,240 cases of gonorrhea, 410 cases of HIV, and 13,170 cases of pelvic inflammatory disease that would have led to 1,130 ectopic pregnancies and 2,210 cases of infertility. Pap and HPV tests and HPV vaccinations prevented an estimated 3,680 cases of cervical cancer and 2,110 cervical cancer deaths; HPV vaccination also prevented 9,000 cases of abnormal sequelae and precancerous lesions. Services provided at health centers supported by the Title X national family planning program accounted for more than half of these benefits. The gross public savings attributed to these services totaled approximately $15.8 billion-$15.7 billion from preventing unplanned births, $123 million from STI/HIV testing, and $23 million from Pap and HPV testing and vaccines. Subtracting $2.2 billion in program costs from gross savings resulted in net public-sector savings of $13.6 billion.ConclusionsPublic expenditures for the US family planning program not only prevented unintended pregnancies but also reduced the incidence and impact of preterm and LBW births, STIs, infertility, and cervical cancer. This investment saved the government billions of public dollars, equivalent to an estimated taxpayer savings of $7.09 for every public dollar spent.

Dataset Information

Providing Family Planning Services at Primary Care Organizations after the Exclusion of Planned Parenthood from Publicly Funded Programs in Texas: Early Qualitative Evidence.

Publications

Providing Family Planning Services at Primary Care Organizations after the Exclusion of Planned Parenthood from Publicly Funded Programs in Texas: Early Qualitative Evidence.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets