Assessing access to care in a postpartum pelvic floor healing clinic.

IF 1.7
Frontiers in urology Pub Date : 2025-04-16 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.3389/fruro.2025.1548341
Anya Singh-Varma, Li Wang, Rachel Durst, Pamela A Moalli, Lauren E Giugale
{"title":"Assessing access to care in a postpartum pelvic floor healing clinic.","authors":"Anya Singh-Varma, Li Wang, Rachel Durst, Pamela A Moalli, Lauren E Giugale","doi":"10.3389/fruro.2025.1548341","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Disparities in pregnancy care exist in the United States, with limited data on access to specialized postpartum care for patients with complicated perineal lacerations. Our objective was to assess for disparities in access to a postpartum pelvic floor healing clinic following vaginal delivery. We hypothesized an underrepresentation of patients from more resource-deprived neighborhoods and those with longer travel times to the specialized clinic.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This is a retrospective cohort study comparing sociodemographic variables from a historical cohort of patients with third- and fourth-degree lacerations following vaginal delivery to a cohort of patients evaluated in a postpartum pelvic floor healing clinic. The primary outcome involved the comparison of the neighborhood area deprivation index between groups. The secondary outcomes included median household income, driving time, and distance to the hospital.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Patients seen in the postpartum pelvic floor healing clinic were older (31.3 vs. 29.9 years, <i>p</i> < 0.01) and more likely to be multiparous (20.3% vs. 13.1%, <i>p</i> = 0.04). Race, ethnicity, and operative vaginal delivery were similar between groups. Patients from the postpartum pelvic floor healing clinic had more postpartum visits [3 (IQR 2-4) vs. 2 (IQR 1-2) visits, <i>p</i> < 0.01]. There was no significant difference in median neighborhood area deprivation indices [4 (IQR 2-7) vs. 5 (IQR 3-7), <i>p</i> = 0.06]. Fewer patients from the most resource-deprived neighborhoods were seen in the postpartum pelvic floor healing clinic, though this was not statistically significant (4.5% vs. 8.9%, <i>p</i> = 0.06). There were no significant differences in median household income or driving distance to the hospital between groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Access to a specialized postpartum pelvic floor healing clinic at our institution appears equitable across several sociodemographic factors.</p>","PeriodicalId":73113,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in urology","volume":"5 ","pages":"1548341"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12327293/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in urology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fruro.2025.1548341","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Disparities in pregnancy care exist in the United States, with limited data on access to specialized postpartum care for patients with complicated perineal lacerations. Our objective was to assess for disparities in access to a postpartum pelvic floor healing clinic following vaginal delivery. We hypothesized an underrepresentation of patients from more resource-deprived neighborhoods and those with longer travel times to the specialized clinic.

Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study comparing sociodemographic variables from a historical cohort of patients with third- and fourth-degree lacerations following vaginal delivery to a cohort of patients evaluated in a postpartum pelvic floor healing clinic. The primary outcome involved the comparison of the neighborhood area deprivation index between groups. The secondary outcomes included median household income, driving time, and distance to the hospital.

Results: Patients seen in the postpartum pelvic floor healing clinic were older (31.3 vs. 29.9 years, p < 0.01) and more likely to be multiparous (20.3% vs. 13.1%, p = 0.04). Race, ethnicity, and operative vaginal delivery were similar between groups. Patients from the postpartum pelvic floor healing clinic had more postpartum visits [3 (IQR 2-4) vs. 2 (IQR 1-2) visits, p < 0.01]. There was no significant difference in median neighborhood area deprivation indices [4 (IQR 2-7) vs. 5 (IQR 3-7), p = 0.06]. Fewer patients from the most resource-deprived neighborhoods were seen in the postpartum pelvic floor healing clinic, though this was not statistically significant (4.5% vs. 8.9%, p = 0.06). There were no significant differences in median household income or driving distance to the hospital between groups.

Conclusions: Access to a specialized postpartum pelvic floor healing clinic at our institution appears equitable across several sociodemographic factors.

评估获得护理在产后盆底愈合诊所。
导读:美国存在妊娠护理方面的差异,关于复杂会阴撕裂伤患者获得专门产后护理的数据有限。我们的目的是评估阴道分娩后进入产后盆底愈合诊所的差异。我们假设来自资源匮乏社区的患者和那些前往专科诊所的时间较长的患者代表性不足。方法:这是一项回顾性队列研究,比较了阴道分娩后三度和四度撕裂伤患者的历史队列与产后盆底愈合诊所评估的患者队列的社会人口学变量。主要结果包括各组间邻里区域剥夺指数的比较。次要结局包括家庭收入中位数、开车时间和到医院的距离。结果:产后盆底愈合门诊就诊的患者年龄较大(31.3岁比29.9岁,p < 0.01),多胎率较高(20.3%比13.1%,p = 0.04)。种族,民族和手术阴道分娩组之间相似。产后盆底愈合门诊就诊的患者产后就诊次数较多[3 (IQR 2 ~ 4)比2 (IQR 1 ~ 2), p < 0.01]。中位邻里面积剥夺指数[4 (IQR 2-7)比5 (IQR 3-7), p = 0.06]差异无统计学意义。来自资源最匮乏社区的患者较少出现在产后盆底愈合诊所,尽管这没有统计学意义(4.5%对8.9%,p = 0.06)。两组之间的家庭收入中位数和到医院的驾车距离没有显著差异。结论:在我们的机构,进入专门的产后盆底愈合诊所似乎在几个社会人口因素方面是公平的。
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
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
小红书