提供者对输精管结扎术的看法:男性决定寻求公共资助服务的文化、性别和政治因素。

IF 2.3 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Frontiers in reproductive health Pub Date : 2024-12-18 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.3389/frph.2024.1386244
Michelle Teti, Denise Raybon, Stephanie Spitz, Shelby Webb, Jacki Witt, Kristin Metcalf-Wilson
{"title":"提供者对输精管结扎术的看法:男性决定寻求公共资助服务的文化、性别和政治因素。","authors":"Michelle Teti, Denise Raybon, Stephanie Spitz, Shelby Webb, Jacki Witt, Kristin Metcalf-Wilson","doi":"10.3389/frph.2024.1386244","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Evidence suggests a new demand for vasectomies following the Supreme Court's Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization [597 U.S. 215 (2022), (Dobbs)]. Vasectomies are safer and more cost-effective than tubal sterilization. Understanding how to support men's use of this procedure is important to improving sexual and reproductive health and wellbeing (SRHW). This study is an exploration of health care providers' perspectives on the gender, cultural and political influences on vasectomies at Title X-funded clinics across all regions of the US.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Providers or health services staff (<i>N</i> = 21) at Title X-funded settings currently offering vasectomy services in their own clinics or via referral were recruited using list serve and email outreach. Participants took part in one-on-one or small group interviews about vasectomy procedures, patient experiences, and trends. A thematic analysis of interview transcripts through an iterative process of reviewing, note-taking, and discussing data assessed provider views on patient cultural, gender, and political vasectomy influences.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Qualitative interviews yielded four themes related to participant access to services, including income challenges, language barriers, medical distrust, and societal gender roles that stressed women's responsibility for contraception. Two additional themes focused on men's fear of losing reproductive health options and desire to \"step up\" to do their part to prevent unplanned pregnancies.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Interviewees stressed that vasectomy was for everyone but identified sub-groups of men who still faced logistical and social access challenges to the procedure. Providers also believed that men were concerned over reproductive justice in the US and wanted to do their part to help prevent unplanned pregnancies. They thought that the Dobbs decision may mark a turning point in reproductive care that could ultimately better public health initiatives and overall SRHW by including men in the conversation. Vasectomy education, marketing-along with policy changes that ease access, can support this goal.</p>","PeriodicalId":73103,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in reproductive health","volume":"6 ","pages":"1386244"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11688344/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Provider views on vasectomy: cultural, gender, and political elements of Men's decisions to seek publicly funded services.\",\"authors\":\"Michelle Teti, Denise Raybon, Stephanie Spitz, Shelby Webb, Jacki Witt, Kristin Metcalf-Wilson\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/frph.2024.1386244\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Evidence suggests a new demand for vasectomies following the Supreme Court's Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization [597 U.S. 215 (2022), (Dobbs)]. Vasectomies are safer and more cost-effective than tubal sterilization. Understanding how to support men's use of this procedure is important to improving sexual and reproductive health and wellbeing (SRHW). This study is an exploration of health care providers' perspectives on the gender, cultural and political influences on vasectomies at Title X-funded clinics across all regions of the US.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Providers or health services staff (<i>N</i> = 21) at Title X-funded settings currently offering vasectomy services in their own clinics or via referral were recruited using list serve and email outreach. Participants took part in one-on-one or small group interviews about vasectomy procedures, patient experiences, and trends. A thematic analysis of interview transcripts through an iterative process of reviewing, note-taking, and discussing data assessed provider views on patient cultural, gender, and political vasectomy influences.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Qualitative interviews yielded four themes related to participant access to services, including income challenges, language barriers, medical distrust, and societal gender roles that stressed women's responsibility for contraception. Two additional themes focused on men's fear of losing reproductive health options and desire to \\\"step up\\\" to do their part to prevent unplanned pregnancies.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Interviewees stressed that vasectomy was for everyone but identified sub-groups of men who still faced logistical and social access challenges to the procedure. Providers also believed that men were concerned over reproductive justice in the US and wanted to do their part to help prevent unplanned pregnancies. They thought that the Dobbs decision may mark a turning point in reproductive care that could ultimately better public health initiatives and overall SRHW by including men in the conversation. Vasectomy education, marketing-along with policy changes that ease access, can support this goal.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73103,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in reproductive health\",\"volume\":\"6 \",\"pages\":\"1386244\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11688344/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in reproductive health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/frph.2024.1386244\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in reproductive health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/frph.2024.1386244","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

引言:有证据表明,在最高法院Dobbs诉杰克逊妇女健康组织案后,输精管切除术的新需求[597 U.S. 215 (2022), (Dobbs)]。输精管结扎术比输卵管绝育术更安全,成本效益更高。了解如何支持男子使用这一程序对于改善性健康和生殖健康和福祉非常重要。本研究旨在探讨医疗保健提供者对性别、文化和政治影响在美国所有地区的标题x资助诊所输精管切除术的观点。方法:采用名单服务和电子邮件外联的方法,在标题x资助的机构中招募目前在自己的诊所或通过转诊提供输精管结扎服务的提供者或卫生服务人员(N = 21)。参与者参加一对一或小组访谈,内容涉及输精管结扎手术、患者经历和趋势。通过回顾、记录和讨论数据的迭代过程对访谈记录进行专题分析,评估提供者对患者文化、性别和政治输精管结扎影响的看法。结果:定性访谈产生了与参与者获得服务有关的四个主题,包括收入挑战、语言障碍、医疗不信任和强调妇女避孕责任的社会性别角色。另外两个主题侧重于男子担心失去生殖健康选择和希望“加紧”尽自己的一份力量防止意外怀孕。讨论:受访者强调输精管结扎术适用于所有人,但确定了仍面临手术后勤和社会准入挑战的男性亚群体。服务提供者还认为,在美国,男性关心生殖公平,并希望尽自己的一份力量来帮助防止意外怀孕。他们认为Dobbs的决定可能标志着生殖保健的一个转折点,通过将男性纳入对话,最终可以改善公共卫生倡议和整体的SRHW。输精管结扎教育,市场营销,以及政策的变化,可以帮助实现这一目标。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Provider views on vasectomy: cultural, gender, and political elements of Men's decisions to seek publicly funded services.

Introduction: Evidence suggests a new demand for vasectomies following the Supreme Court's Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization [597 U.S. 215 (2022), (Dobbs)]. Vasectomies are safer and more cost-effective than tubal sterilization. Understanding how to support men's use of this procedure is important to improving sexual and reproductive health and wellbeing (SRHW). This study is an exploration of health care providers' perspectives on the gender, cultural and political influences on vasectomies at Title X-funded clinics across all regions of the US.

Methods: Providers or health services staff (N = 21) at Title X-funded settings currently offering vasectomy services in their own clinics or via referral were recruited using list serve and email outreach. Participants took part in one-on-one or small group interviews about vasectomy procedures, patient experiences, and trends. A thematic analysis of interview transcripts through an iterative process of reviewing, note-taking, and discussing data assessed provider views on patient cultural, gender, and political vasectomy influences.

Results: Qualitative interviews yielded four themes related to participant access to services, including income challenges, language barriers, medical distrust, and societal gender roles that stressed women's responsibility for contraception. Two additional themes focused on men's fear of losing reproductive health options and desire to "step up" to do their part to prevent unplanned pregnancies.

Discussion: Interviewees stressed that vasectomy was for everyone but identified sub-groups of men who still faced logistical and social access challenges to the procedure. Providers also believed that men were concerned over reproductive justice in the US and wanted to do their part to help prevent unplanned pregnancies. They thought that the Dobbs decision may mark a turning point in reproductive care that could ultimately better public health initiatives and overall SRHW by including men in the conversation. Vasectomy education, marketing-along with policy changes that ease access, can support this goal.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
13 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