Association of rural location and long acting reversible contraceptive use among Oregon Medicaid recipients

Contraceptive Provision to Women With Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities Enrolled in Medicaid

OBJECTIVE

To compare contraceptive provision to women with and without intellectual and developmental disabilities enrolled in North Carolina Medicaid.

METHODS

Our retrospective cohort study used 2019 North Carolina Medicaid claims to identify women aged 15-44 years with and without intellectual and developmental disabilities at risk for pregnancy who were continuously enrolled during 2019 or had Family Planning Medicaid with at least one claim. We calculated the proportion in each cohort who received 1) most or moderately effective contraception, 2) long-acting reversible contraception, 3) short-acting contraception, and 4) individual methods. We classified contraceptive receipt by procedure type and disaggregated across sociodemographic characteristics. Adjusting for age, race, ethnicity, and urban or rural setting, we constructed logistic regression models to estimate most or moderately effective contraceptive provision odds by intellectual and developmental disability status and by level or type of intellectual and developmental disability. We performed subanalyses to estimate co-occurrence of provision and menstrual disorders.

RESULTS

Among 9,508 women with intellectual and developmental disabilities and 299,978 without, a significantly smaller proportion with intellectual and developmental disabilities received most or moderately effective contraception (30.1% vs 36.3%, P <.001). With the exception of injectable contraception, this trend was consistent across all measures and remained statistically significant after controlling for race, ethnicity, age, and urban or rural status (adjusted odds ratio 0.75, 95% CI 0.72-0.79; P <.001). Among those who received most or moderately effective contraception, a significantly greater proportion of women with intellectual and developmental disabilities had co-occurring menstrual disorders (31.3% vs 24.3%, P <.001).

CONCLUSION

These findings suggest disparities in contraceptive provision and potential differences in clinical indication by intellectual and developmental disability status. Future studies should investigate reasons for and barriers to contraceptive use among women with intellectual and developmental disabilities.

Association Between Facility and Clinician Characteristics and Family Planning Services Provided During U.S. Outpatient Care Visits

INTRODUCTION

Recent guidelines from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention emphasize the importance of access to comprehensive family planning services and recommend patient-centered contraceptive counseling be incorporated into routine primary care visits for reproductive-age individuals. This study aims to describe family planning service provision in outpatient care settings and assess differences by facility and clinician characteristics.

METHODS

Using National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey data, a nationally representative survey of outpatient care visits, we assessed family planning service provision by facility location, facility type, physician specialty, types of clinicians seen, and whether the patient was seen by their primary care provider. We used random intercept logistic regression with robust standard errors, adjusting for patient characteristics, and state and year fixed effects.

RESULTS

The analytic sample included 53,489 patient visits with reproductive-age (15-49 years) individuals between 2011 and 2019. Family planning services were provided at 8% of total sampled visits and were more likely to be provided in urban compared with rural areas (adjusted odds ratio, 1.45; p = .02) and at community health centers compared with private physician practices (adjusted odds ratio, 1.74; p = .00). Family planning services were also more likely to be provided when the patient saw a physician assistant or nurse compared with only a physician. After controlling for observed covariates, measures of between-clinician heterogeneity indicate wide variation in which clinicians provided family planning services.

CONCLUSIONS

Family planning services were more likely to be provided in urban areas, at community health centers, and when patients received team-based care. The wide variation between clinicians suggests a need to better incorporate family planning services into primary care and other outpatient settings to meet patient needs and preferences.

Geographic Variation In Effective Contraceptive Use Among Medicaid Recipients In 2018

Medicaid is the largest payer for publicly funded contraception, serving millions of women across the United States. However, relatively little is known about the extent to which effective contraceptive services vary geographically for Medicaid recipients. This study used national Medicaid claims to assess county-level variation in rates of provision of the most or moderately effective methods of contraception and provision of long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) across forty states and Washington, D.C., in 2018. County-level rates of most or moderately effective contraceptive use varied almost fourfold across states, from a low of 10.8 percent to a high of 44.4 percent. Rates of LARC provision varied almost tenfold, from a low of 1.0 percent to a high of 9.6 percent. Despite the fact that contraception is a core benefit within Medicaid, access and use vary substantially across and within states. Medicaid agencies have a variety of options to ensure that people have access to a choice of the full range of contraceptive methods, including removing or loosening utilization controls, incorporating quality metrics or value-based payments into contraceptive services, and adjusting reimbursement to remove barriers to the clinical provision of LARC.

Association Between Oregon’s 12-Month Contraceptive Supply Policy and Quantity of Contraceptives Dispensed

Question

Is legislation requiring insurers to cover 12 months of short-acting hormonal contraception associated with an increase in 12-month contraceptive prescriptions?

Findings

This cohort study found that more than 80% of prescriptions for contraceptives cover 3 months or fewer. Legislation mandating insurance coverage of annual prescriptions was not associated with an increase in 12-month prescriptions, although it was associated with a shift from 1-month prescriptions to prescriptions for 2 to 3 months.

Meaning

Eliminating the need to return to a pharmacy every 30 or 90 days to refill prescriptions will likely require changes beyond insurance coverage and may necessitate outreach and education to clinicians and insurers.

Importance

Eighteen states, including Oregon, have passed legislation requiring insurers to cover dispensation of a 12-month supply of short-acting, hormonal contraception.

Objective

To determine whether Oregon’s 2016 12-month supply law was associated with an increase in contraceptive supply received.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective cohort study of hormonal contraceptive users using Oregon’s All Payer All Claims database examined the quantity of contraceptive supply dispensed 3 years before and 3 years after the 2016 policy change. We also assessed changes among patients attributed to Title X clinics.

Exposures

Legislation requiring insurers in Oregon to cover a 12-month supply of contraception to continuing users.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Receipt of a 12-month supply of hormonal contraception

Results

This cohort study of insured users (mean [SD] age, 27.4 [2.1] years) of short-acting hormonal contraception included 639 053 contraceptive prescriptions. Results indicated that more than 80% of prescriptions for contraceptives cover 3 months or fewer. Most women in the study population used the oral contraceptive pill, lived in a metropolitan area, and were privately insured. We did not observe a significant association between the passage of the 12-month supply policy and receipt of a 12-month supply (aOR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.74-1.38). Receipt of a 12-month supply was more common for Medicaid recipients than the privately insured (aOR, 9.40; 95% CI, 6.62-13.34). We did find a shift from 1 month to 2 to 3 months supply being dispensed. The policy change was associated with a small, overall increase in quantity dispensed (0.27 months supply; 95% CI, 0.15 to –0.38). Title X clinics prescribed 3 months more of contraceptive supply than non–Title X clinics (3.03 months supply; 95% CI, 2.64-3.41). However, the policy change was not associated with increased contraceptive supply dispensed at Title X clinics.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cohort study of insured users of short-acting hormonal contraception, the passage of a 12-month contraceptive supply policy was not associated with an increase in contraceptive supply dispensed.