Cargando…

Accessibility of federally funded family planning services in South Carolina and Alabama

This study operationalized the five dimensions of health care access in the context of contraceptive service provision and used this framework to examine access to contraceptive care at health department (HD) (Title X funded) and federally qualified health center (FQHC) (primarily non-Title X funded...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Beatty, Kate E, Smith, Michael G, Khoury, Amal J, Zheng, Shimin, Ventura, Liane M, Okwori, Glory
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7980054/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33767947
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pmedr.2021.101343
_version_ 1783667373804355584
author Beatty, Kate E
Smith, Michael G
Khoury, Amal J
Zheng, Shimin
Ventura, Liane M
Okwori, Glory
author_facet Beatty, Kate E
Smith, Michael G
Khoury, Amal J
Zheng, Shimin
Ventura, Liane M
Okwori, Glory
author_sort Beatty, Kate E
collection PubMed
description This study operationalized the five dimensions of health care access in the context of contraceptive service provision and used this framework to examine access to contraceptive care at health department (HD) (Title X funded) and federally qualified health center (FQHC) (primarily non-Title X funded) clinics in South Carolina and Alabama. A cross-sectional survey was conducted in 2017/18 that assessed clinic-level characteristics, policies, and practices related to contraceptive provision. Provision of different contraceptive methods was examined between clinic types. Survey items were mapped to the dimensions of access and internal consistency for each scale was tested with Cronbach’s alpha. Scores of access were developed and differences by clinic type were evaluated with an independent t-test. The overall response rate was 68.3% and the sample included 235 clinics. HDs (96.9%) were significantly more likely to provide IUDs and/or Impants on-site than FQHCs (37.4%) (P < 0.0001). Scales with the highest consistency were Availability: Clinical Policy (24 items) (alpha = 0.892) and Acceptability (43 items) (alpha = 0.834). HDs had higher access scores than FQHCs for the Availability: Clinical Policy scale (0.58, 95% CL 0.55, 0.61) vs (0.29, 95% CL 0.25, 0.33) and Affordability: Administrative Policy scale (0.86, 95% CL 0.83, 0.90) vs (0.47, 95% CL 0.41, 0.53). FQHCs had higher access scores than HDs for Affordability: Insurance Policy (0.78, 95% CL 0.72, 0.84) vs (0.56, 95% CL 0.53, 0.59). These findings highlight strengths and gaps in contraceptive care access. Future studies must examine the impact of each dimension of access on clinic-level contraceptive utilization.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7980054
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-79800542021-03-24 Accessibility of federally funded family planning services in South Carolina and Alabama Beatty, Kate E Smith, Michael G Khoury, Amal J Zheng, Shimin Ventura, Liane M Okwori, Glory Prev Med Rep Regular Article This study operationalized the five dimensions of health care access in the context of contraceptive service provision and used this framework to examine access to contraceptive care at health department (HD) (Title X funded) and federally qualified health center (FQHC) (primarily non-Title X funded) clinics in South Carolina and Alabama. A cross-sectional survey was conducted in 2017/18 that assessed clinic-level characteristics, policies, and practices related to contraceptive provision. Provision of different contraceptive methods was examined between clinic types. Survey items were mapped to the dimensions of access and internal consistency for each scale was tested with Cronbach’s alpha. Scores of access were developed and differences by clinic type were evaluated with an independent t-test. The overall response rate was 68.3% and the sample included 235 clinics. HDs (96.9%) were significantly more likely to provide IUDs and/or Impants on-site than FQHCs (37.4%) (P < 0.0001). Scales with the highest consistency were Availability: Clinical Policy (24 items) (alpha = 0.892) and Acceptability (43 items) (alpha = 0.834). HDs had higher access scores than FQHCs for the Availability: Clinical Policy scale (0.58, 95% CL 0.55, 0.61) vs (0.29, 95% CL 0.25, 0.33) and Affordability: Administrative Policy scale (0.86, 95% CL 0.83, 0.90) vs (0.47, 95% CL 0.41, 0.53). FQHCs had higher access scores than HDs for Affordability: Insurance Policy (0.78, 95% CL 0.72, 0.84) vs (0.56, 95% CL 0.53, 0.59). These findings highlight strengths and gaps in contraceptive care access. Future studies must examine the impact of each dimension of access on clinic-level contraceptive utilization. 2021-03-07 /pmc/articles/PMC7980054/ /pubmed/33767947 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pmedr.2021.101343 Text en © 2021 The Authors http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Regular Article
Beatty, Kate E
Smith, Michael G
Khoury, Amal J
Zheng, Shimin
Ventura, Liane M
Okwori, Glory
Accessibility of federally funded family planning services in South Carolina and Alabama
title Accessibility of federally funded family planning services in South Carolina and Alabama
title_full Accessibility of federally funded family planning services in South Carolina and Alabama
title_fullStr Accessibility of federally funded family planning services in South Carolina and Alabama
title_full_unstemmed Accessibility of federally funded family planning services in South Carolina and Alabama
title_short Accessibility of federally funded family planning services in South Carolina and Alabama
title_sort accessibility of federally funded family planning services in south carolina and alabama
topic Regular Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7980054/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33767947
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pmedr.2021.101343
work_keys_str_mv AT beattykatee accessibilityoffederallyfundedfamilyplanningservicesinsouthcarolinaandalabama
AT smithmichaelg accessibilityoffederallyfundedfamilyplanningservicesinsouthcarolinaandalabama
AT khouryamalj accessibilityoffederallyfundedfamilyplanningservicesinsouthcarolinaandalabama
AT zhengshimin accessibilityoffederallyfundedfamilyplanningservicesinsouthcarolinaandalabama
AT venturalianem accessibilityoffederallyfundedfamilyplanningservicesinsouthcarolinaandalabama
AT okworiglory accessibilityoffederallyfundedfamilyplanningservicesinsouthcarolinaandalabama