Nicholas Rubashkin, Ifeyinwa V Asiodu, Saraswathi Vedam, Carolyn Sufrin, Miriam Kuppermann, Vincanne Adams
{"title":"Automating Racism: Is Use of the Vaginal Birth After Cesarean Calculator Associated with Inequity in Perinatal Service Delivery?","authors":"Nicholas Rubashkin, Ifeyinwa V Asiodu, Saraswathi Vedam, Carolyn Sufrin, Miriam Kuppermann, Vincanne Adams","doi":"10.1007/s40615-024-02233-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The clinical application of race-adjusted algorithms may perpetuate health inequities. We assessed the impact of the vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) calculator, which was revised in 2021 to address concerns about equity. The original algorithm factored race and ethnicity and gave lower VBAC probabilities to Black and Hispanic patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>From 2019 to 2020, we conducted a multi-site, ethnographic study consisting of interviews and audio recordings of 14 prenatal visits. We used grounded theory to describe the social processes of racialization.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>Across 4 sites, 12 obstetricians, 5 midwives, and 31 pregnant/postpartum patients participated. Seventy-four percent (N = 23) of the pregnant/postpartum individuals identified as racially minoritized, and the remaining 24% (N = 8) identified as White. We identified four processes that facilitated the \"automation\" of racism: adhering to strict cutoffs; the routine adoption of calculators; obfuscating the calculator; and the reflexive categorization of race and ethnicity. When clinicians adhered to strict cutoffs, they steered low-scoring Black and Hispanic patients toward repeat cesareans. If clinicians obfuscated the calculator, Black and Hispanic patients had to work to decode the role of race and ethnicity in their probabilities in order to pursue a VBAC. By reflexively categorizing race and ethnicity, the use of the calculator forced patients to choose a singular identity, even if it obscured the truth about their multi-faceted race or ethnicity.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The VBAC calculator's inclusion of race and ethnicity helped to automate racism by coding race into institutional practices and care interactions. This resulted in some clinicians discouraging or prohibiting Black and Hispanic patients from attempting a VBAC.</p><p><strong>Significance: </strong>To date, no empiric study has examined whether the VBAC calculator produced inequities in access to VBAC services and reproduced racism in care. The VBAC calculator resulted in fewer VBAC attempts among racially minoritized patients, denying them the opportunity to undergo labor and a vaginal birthing experience.</p>","PeriodicalId":16921,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40615-024-02233-4","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: The clinical application of race-adjusted algorithms may perpetuate health inequities. We assessed the impact of the vaginal birth after cesarean (VBAC) calculator, which was revised in 2021 to address concerns about equity. The original algorithm factored race and ethnicity and gave lower VBAC probabilities to Black and Hispanic patients.
Methods: From 2019 to 2020, we conducted a multi-site, ethnographic study consisting of interviews and audio recordings of 14 prenatal visits. We used grounded theory to describe the social processes of racialization.
Findings: Across 4 sites, 12 obstetricians, 5 midwives, and 31 pregnant/postpartum patients participated. Seventy-four percent (N = 23) of the pregnant/postpartum individuals identified as racially minoritized, and the remaining 24% (N = 8) identified as White. We identified four processes that facilitated the "automation" of racism: adhering to strict cutoffs; the routine adoption of calculators; obfuscating the calculator; and the reflexive categorization of race and ethnicity. When clinicians adhered to strict cutoffs, they steered low-scoring Black and Hispanic patients toward repeat cesareans. If clinicians obfuscated the calculator, Black and Hispanic patients had to work to decode the role of race and ethnicity in their probabilities in order to pursue a VBAC. By reflexively categorizing race and ethnicity, the use of the calculator forced patients to choose a singular identity, even if it obscured the truth about their multi-faceted race or ethnicity.
Conclusion: The VBAC calculator's inclusion of race and ethnicity helped to automate racism by coding race into institutional practices and care interactions. This resulted in some clinicians discouraging or prohibiting Black and Hispanic patients from attempting a VBAC.
Significance: To date, no empiric study has examined whether the VBAC calculator produced inequities in access to VBAC services and reproduced racism in care. The VBAC calculator resulted in fewer VBAC attempts among racially minoritized patients, denying them the opportunity to undergo labor and a vaginal birthing experience.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities reports on the scholarly progress of work to understand, address, and ultimately eliminate health disparities based on race and ethnicity. Efforts to explore underlying causes of health disparities and to describe interventions that have been undertaken to address racial and ethnic health disparities are featured. Promising studies that are ongoing or studies that have longer term data are welcome, as are studies that serve as lessons for best practices in eliminating health disparities. Original research, systematic reviews, and commentaries presenting the state-of-the-art thinking on problems centered on health disparities will be considered for publication. We particularly encourage review articles that generate innovative and testable ideas, and constructive discussions and/or critiques of health disparities.Because the Journal of Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities receives a large number of submissions, about 30% of submissions to the Journal are sent out for full peer review.