Open AccessAdherence to Recommended Practices for Provision of Long-Acting Reversible Contraception Among Providers in a Large U.S. Health Care System
Author(s) -
Colleen Judge-Golden,
Harold C. Wiesenfeld,
Beatrice A. Chen,
Sonya Borrero
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
journal of women's health
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.195
H-Index - 98
eISSN - 1931-843X
pISSN - 1540-9996
DOI - 10.1089/jwh.2019.8169
Subject(s) - medicine , contraceptive implant , specialty , family medicine , logistic regression , intrauterine device , long acting reversible contraception , family planning , implant , health care , obstetrics and gynaecology , population , obstetrics , pregnancy , surgery , environmental health , research methodology , biology , economics , genetics , economic growth
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.