Provision of Moderately and Highly Effective Reversible Contraception to Insured Women With Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities.

Obstet Gynecol

Department of Family Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan; the Lurie Institute for Disability Policy, Brandeis University, Waltham, and the Bouvé College of Health Sciences, Northeastern University, Boston, Massachusetts; and Mt. Sinai Downtown Residency in Urban Family Medicine, New York, New York.

Published: September 2018

AI Article Synopsis

  • The study aimed to assess the availability of effective contraceptives for women with intellectual and developmental disabilities compared to those without such disabilities.
  • Data from Massachusetts highlighted that women with disabilities were significantly less likely to receive long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) and moderately effective contraceptive methods than their peers without disabilities.
  • An exception was noted for the progestin shot, which was provided more frequently to women with disabilities, suggesting disparities in contraceptive method accessibility and highlighting the need for improved healthcare support for this population.

Article Abstract

Objective: To estimate provision of moderately and highly effective reversible contraceptives to women with intellectual and developmental disabilities.

Methods: We used data from the Massachusetts All-Payer Claims Database to identify women aged 15-44 years with and without intellectual and developmental disabilities who were continuously enrolled in a private commercial insurance plan, Medicaid, or Medicare in 2012. We calculated the percentage of women aged 15-44 years who were not medically or surgically sterile and were provided 1) highly effective, long-acting reversible contraception (LARC, the intrauterine device or subdermal implant); or 2) prescriptions for moderately effective methods (pill, patch, ring, shot, or diaphragm). Logistic regression models estimated the odds of LARC and moderately effective method provision by disability status, adjusted for age, income, and Medicaid receipt.

Results: Among 915,561 women who were not medically or surgically sterile, 13,059 women (1.4%) had at least one intellectual and developmental disability. Women with intellectual and developmental disabilities were less likely to be provided LARC (2.1% vs 4.2%, P<.001, adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.43, 95% CI 0.38-0.48, P<.001) and moderately effective methods (21.1% vs 29.9%, P<.001, adjusted OR 0.68, 95% CI 0.65-0.71, P<.001) than women without intellectual and developmental disabilities. The one exception was the progestin shot, which was provided more often to women with intellectual and developmental disabilities than women without these disabilities (14.7% vs 4.3%, P<.001). Among a subset of women who only received moderately effective methods or LARC (n=310,344), women with intellectual and developmental disability had lower odds of receiving LARC than moderately effective methods (adjusted OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.52-0.67).

Conclusion: The study findings raise concerns that the provision of LARC and moderately effective methods differs based on the presence of intellectual and developmental disabilities. Greater understanding is needed regarding factors that underlie lower provision of LARC in comparison with moderately effective methods, especially the progestin shot, among women with intellectual and developmental disabilities.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6105436PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0000000000002777DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

intellectual developmental
20
highly effective
12
women intellectual
12
developmental disabilities
12
provision moderately
8
moderately highly
8
effective reversible
8
reversible contraception
8
women aged
8
aged 15-44
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!