State Medicaid insurance barriers to vasectomy coverage are associated with restrictive abortion laws.

IF 2.1 3区 医学 Q2 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
Emily Clennon, Anna Geduldig, Nicholas H Chakiryan, Jason C Hedges, Casey A Seideman
{"title":"State Medicaid insurance barriers to vasectomy coverage are associated with restrictive abortion laws.","authors":"Emily Clennon, Anna Geduldig, Nicholas H Chakiryan, Jason C Hedges, Casey A Seideman","doi":"10.1016/j.urology.2025.06.031","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To determine if state populations have equitable access to vasectomy under Medicaid and evaluate the relationship between accessibility of Medicaid-covered vasectomy and state abortion restrictions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Individual state-based Medicaid rules were assessed by publicly available data for all 50 states and Washington D.C. A novel scoring system quantifying restrictions to Medicaid coverage for vasectomy was developed utilizing state-specific Medicaid income eligibility criteria, presence or absence of extended family planning benefits, and any additional prohibitive vasectomy coverage policies (0-4 points; 0 no restrictions - 4 most restrictions).  Abortion access was quantified using the Guttmacher Institute's ranking of state abortion policy restrictions (1 most protective, 7 most restrictive). Fisher's exact test (α < 0.05) was used to evaluate the relationship between vasectomy access score and abortion access.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fifty-one Medicaid regions (50 states and Washington DC) were analyzed. For vasectomy access, each had a point assigned for a mandatory 30-day waiting period. Eighteen states (35%) had only 1 point assigned, 25 (49%) had 2, and 7 (14%) had 3 points. Texas was the only state to receive 4 points, correlating with the greatest number of barriers to vasectomy, due an additional consent form beyond the conventional paperwork. There was a statistically significant relationship between state Medicaid vasectomy coverage and restrictions on abortion access (p=0.01). States with more barriers to Medicaid vasectomy coverage were more likely to have laws restricting abortion.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Access to vasectomy under Medicaid varies greatly by state. States with the most limited access to coverage also had the most restrictive abortion laws.</p>","PeriodicalId":23415,"journal":{"name":"Urology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Urology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2025.06.031","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: To determine if state populations have equitable access to vasectomy under Medicaid and evaluate the relationship between accessibility of Medicaid-covered vasectomy and state abortion restrictions.

Methods: Individual state-based Medicaid rules were assessed by publicly available data for all 50 states and Washington D.C. A novel scoring system quantifying restrictions to Medicaid coverage for vasectomy was developed utilizing state-specific Medicaid income eligibility criteria, presence or absence of extended family planning benefits, and any additional prohibitive vasectomy coverage policies (0-4 points; 0 no restrictions - 4 most restrictions).  Abortion access was quantified using the Guttmacher Institute's ranking of state abortion policy restrictions (1 most protective, 7 most restrictive). Fisher's exact test (α < 0.05) was used to evaluate the relationship between vasectomy access score and abortion access.

Results: Fifty-one Medicaid regions (50 states and Washington DC) were analyzed. For vasectomy access, each had a point assigned for a mandatory 30-day waiting period. Eighteen states (35%) had only 1 point assigned, 25 (49%) had 2, and 7 (14%) had 3 points. Texas was the only state to receive 4 points, correlating with the greatest number of barriers to vasectomy, due an additional consent form beyond the conventional paperwork. There was a statistically significant relationship between state Medicaid vasectomy coverage and restrictions on abortion access (p=0.01). States with more barriers to Medicaid vasectomy coverage were more likely to have laws restricting abortion.

Conclusions: Access to vasectomy under Medicaid varies greatly by state. States with the most limited access to coverage also had the most restrictive abortion laws.

国家医疗补助保险对输精管切除术的限制与限制性堕胎法有关。
目的:确定国家人口在医疗补助下是否公平获得输精管结扎术,并评估医疗补助覆盖输精管结扎术 的可及性与国家堕胎限制之间的关系。方法:根据所有50个州和华盛顿特区的公开数据,对各州的医疗补助规定进行评估。利用各州特定的医疗补助收入资格标准,是否存在扩展计划生育福利,以及任何额外的禁忌性输精管切除术覆盖政策,开发了一种新的量化医疗补助覆盖范围限制的评分系统(0-4分;0没有限制- 4有最多限制)。  使用古特马赫研究所对各州堕胎政策限制的排名(1个最保护,7个最限制)来量化堕胎途径。采用Fisher精确检验(α < 0.05)评价输精管结扎通路评分与流产通路的关系。结果:分析了51个医疗补助地区(50个州和华盛顿特区)。对于输精管切除术,每个人都有一个指定的30天强制等待期。18个州(35%)只有1分,25个州(49%)有2分,7个州(14%)有3分。德克萨斯州是唯一一个获得4分的州,这与输精管结扎障碍最多有关,因为除了传统的文书工作之外,还有一份额外的同意书。 国家医疗补助输精管结扎覆盖率与堕胎限制之间有统计学意义的关系(p=0.01)。在医疗补助输精管切除术覆盖范围障碍较多的州,更有可能制定限制堕胎的法律。结论:在医疗补助下获得输精管结扎的机会因州而异。医保覆盖面最有限的州也有最严格的堕胎法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Urology
Urology 医学-泌尿学与肾脏学
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
9.50%
发文量
716
审稿时长
59 days
期刊介绍: Urology is a monthly, peer–reviewed journal primarily for urologists, residents, interns, nephrologists, and other specialists interested in urology The mission of Urology®, the "Gold Journal," is to provide practical, timely, and relevant clinical and basic science information to physicians and researchers practicing the art of urology worldwide. Urology® publishes original articles relating to adult and pediatric clinical urology as well as to clinical and basic science research. Topics in Urology® include pediatrics, surgical oncology, radiology, pathology, erectile dysfunction, infertility, incontinence, transplantation, endourology, andrology, female urology, reconstructive surgery, and medical oncology, as well as relevant basic science issues. Special features include rapid communication of important timely issues, surgeon''s workshops, interesting case reports, surgical techniques, clinical and basic science review articles, guest editorials, letters to the editor, book reviews, and historical articles in urology.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信