Lisa LeRoy , Linda Chamiec-Case , Michela Garrison , Madeline Mador , Laura Perez , Kirsten Meisinger , Samantha Fox
{"title":"Implementing SINC (Self-Identified Need for Contraception) screening: A mixed methods case study","authors":"Lisa LeRoy , Linda Chamiec-Case , Michela Garrison , Madeline Mador , Laura Perez , Kirsten Meisinger , Samantha Fox","doi":"10.1016/j.contraception.2025.111315","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>This mixed-methods case study examined implementation of an adapted Self-Identified Need for Contraception (SINC) screening for all genders aged 12–44 in four Cambridge Health Alliance (CHA) primary care sites. We focused on assigned-male-at-birth (AMAB) patients, who are not typically exposed to routine opportunities to discuss contraception. We explored these study questions: How did screening rates vary over time by site and patient characteristics (sex, age and language)?; What did healthcare staff perceive as facilitators or challenges to implementation?; and how acceptable was adapted-SINC screening to AMAB patients?</div></div><div><h3>Study Design</h3><div>We estimated mixed effects models to analyze electronic health record (EHR) data on screening and need rates by site, sex, age, and language. We conducted interviews with CHA staff (<em>n</em> = 11) across two time points about implementation, and with AMAB patients (<em>n</em> = 28) about experiences and acceptability of screening. We used a convergent design, analyzing EHR and interview data in parallel and integrating findings.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>By quarter 4 (9–12 months after screening initiation) adjusted screening rates were significantly higher than quarter 1. At 15–18 months, unadjusted (raw) rates ranged from 39.0% to 79.0% by site and were 56.4%/44.6% for assigned-female-at-birth/AMAB patients. Interviews revealed key learnings about implementation facilitators. Both staff and AMAB patients found screening manageable, acceptable, and beneficial. All patient interviewees reported comfort with screening.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Findings provide actionable guidance for SINC implementation, including strategies to build buy-in, increase adoption, anticipate barriers, adapt workflows, and establish realistic timelines. Screening likely helped normalize contraceptive care and identify unmet contraceptive needs.</div></div><div><h3>Implications statement</h3><div>Implementing an adapted version of SINC screening in primary care with patients of all genders ages 12–44 was manageable and acceptable to staff and AMAB patients. The study contributes original insights from AMAB patients. This adapted-SINC likely helped normalize contraceptive care and surface unmet needs. Findings offer actionable guidance for organizations seeking to implement SINC.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":10762,"journal":{"name":"Contraception","volume":"155 ","pages":"Article 111315"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Contraception","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0010782425005062","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/12/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives
This mixed-methods case study examined implementation of an adapted Self-Identified Need for Contraception (SINC) screening for all genders aged 12–44 in four Cambridge Health Alliance (CHA) primary care sites. We focused on assigned-male-at-birth (AMAB) patients, who are not typically exposed to routine opportunities to discuss contraception. We explored these study questions: How did screening rates vary over time by site and patient characteristics (sex, age and language)?; What did healthcare staff perceive as facilitators or challenges to implementation?; and how acceptable was adapted-SINC screening to AMAB patients?
Study Design
We estimated mixed effects models to analyze electronic health record (EHR) data on screening and need rates by site, sex, age, and language. We conducted interviews with CHA staff (n = 11) across two time points about implementation, and with AMAB patients (n = 28) about experiences and acceptability of screening. We used a convergent design, analyzing EHR and interview data in parallel and integrating findings.
Results
By quarter 4 (9–12 months after screening initiation) adjusted screening rates were significantly higher than quarter 1. At 15–18 months, unadjusted (raw) rates ranged from 39.0% to 79.0% by site and were 56.4%/44.6% for assigned-female-at-birth/AMAB patients. Interviews revealed key learnings about implementation facilitators. Both staff and AMAB patients found screening manageable, acceptable, and beneficial. All patient interviewees reported comfort with screening.
Conclusions
Findings provide actionable guidance for SINC implementation, including strategies to build buy-in, increase adoption, anticipate barriers, adapt workflows, and establish realistic timelines. Screening likely helped normalize contraceptive care and identify unmet contraceptive needs.
Implications statement
Implementing an adapted version of SINC screening in primary care with patients of all genders ages 12–44 was manageable and acceptable to staff and AMAB patients. The study contributes original insights from AMAB patients. This adapted-SINC likely helped normalize contraceptive care and surface unmet needs. Findings offer actionable guidance for organizations seeking to implement SINC.
期刊介绍:
Contraception has an open access mirror journal Contraception: X, sharing the same aims and scope, editorial team, submission system and rigorous peer review.
The journal Contraception wishes to advance reproductive health through the rapid publication of the best and most interesting new scholarship regarding contraception and related fields such as abortion. The journal welcomes manuscripts from investigators working in the laboratory, clinical and social sciences, as well as public health and health professions education.