Postpartum Patient Perspectives on the US Medicaid Waiting Period for Permanent Contraception.

IF 1.8 Q3 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Open access journal of contraception Pub Date : 2025-02-25 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.2147/OAJC.S506703
Joline S Hartheimer, Brooke W Bullington, Kristen A Berg, Kari White, Margaret Boozer, Tania Serna, Emily S Miller, Jennifer L Bailit, Kavita Shah Arora
{"title":"Postpartum Patient Perspectives on the US Medicaid Waiting Period for Permanent Contraception.","authors":"Joline S Hartheimer, Brooke W Bullington, Kristen A Berg, Kari White, Margaret Boozer, Tania Serna, Emily S Miller, Jennifer L Bailit, Kavita Shah Arora","doi":"10.2147/OAJC.S506703","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The Medicaid Consent to Sterilization policy is a known barrier to permanent contraception (PC) fulfillment and is associated with disparities in fulfillment. While physician perspectives regarding the policy are well described, knowledge of how patients with Medicaid seeking PC perceive this waiting period is limited.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>We interviewed 81 participants with a documented desire for PC at discharge from their hospital-based delivery at four medical centers across the United States. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using rapid qualitative methodologies and thematic content analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 81 participants interviewed, the 56 participants subject to the mandatory waiting period through insurance status or state residency were included in this analysis. Key positive themes included the role of the waiting period in facilitating minimization of regret, independent decision making, and protection against coercion and bias. Key negative themes included interference with reproductive autonomy, harm to the patient-clinician relationship, and introduction of unwanted doubt into contraceptive decisions. In addition, participants expressed both indifference and nuance when discussing the waiting period, and misinformation about the waiting period was prevalent during interviews. Participants with favorable opinions commonly changed their mind regarding PC, while participants with negative opinions were steadfast in their desires for PC and often experienced PC non-fulfillment.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Postpartum patients hold diverse views on the current Medicaid Consent to Sterilization policy's mandated waiting period. Patient engagement is fundamental when reevaluating and revising this policy to balance supporting autonomous decision-making about PC while protecting against reproductive coercion and regret.</p><p><strong>Implications: </strong>In policy revision discussions, it is important to consider whether a mandated waiting period is the best way to minimize regret and promote autonomy. Revision that accounts for the complexity of patient desires and needs is imperative to achieving the dual goals of minimizing coercion and ensuring autonomously-desired provision.</p>","PeriodicalId":74348,"journal":{"name":"Open access journal of contraception","volume":"16 ","pages":"31-41"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11871919/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Open access journal of contraception","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/OAJC.S506703","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: The Medicaid Consent to Sterilization policy is a known barrier to permanent contraception (PC) fulfillment and is associated with disparities in fulfillment. While physician perspectives regarding the policy are well described, knowledge of how patients with Medicaid seeking PC perceive this waiting period is limited.

Study design: We interviewed 81 participants with a documented desire for PC at discharge from their hospital-based delivery at four medical centers across the United States. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using rapid qualitative methodologies and thematic content analysis.

Results: Of the 81 participants interviewed, the 56 participants subject to the mandatory waiting period through insurance status or state residency were included in this analysis. Key positive themes included the role of the waiting period in facilitating minimization of regret, independent decision making, and protection against coercion and bias. Key negative themes included interference with reproductive autonomy, harm to the patient-clinician relationship, and introduction of unwanted doubt into contraceptive decisions. In addition, participants expressed both indifference and nuance when discussing the waiting period, and misinformation about the waiting period was prevalent during interviews. Participants with favorable opinions commonly changed their mind regarding PC, while participants with negative opinions were steadfast in their desires for PC and often experienced PC non-fulfillment.

Conclusion: Postpartum patients hold diverse views on the current Medicaid Consent to Sterilization policy's mandated waiting period. Patient engagement is fundamental when reevaluating and revising this policy to balance supporting autonomous decision-making about PC while protecting against reproductive coercion and regret.

Implications: In policy revision discussions, it is important to consider whether a mandated waiting period is the best way to minimize regret and promote autonomy. Revision that accounts for the complexity of patient desires and needs is imperative to achieving the dual goals of minimizing coercion and ensuring autonomously-desired provision.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
16 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信