Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34602326›Full record

ReviewWomen's health issues : official publication of the Jacobs Institute of Women's Health

Immediate Postpartum Long-Acting Reversible Contraception: Review of Insertion and Device Reimbursement Policies.

Charlan D Kroelinger, Ekwutosi M Okoroh, Keriann Uesugi, Lisa Romero, Olivia R Sappenfield, Julia F Howland, Shanna Cox

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Women's health issues : official publication of the Jacobs Institute of Women's Health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Charlan D KroelingerDivision of Reproductive Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia. Electronic address: ckroelinger@cdc.gov.
Ekwutosi M OkorohDivision of Reproductive Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia.
Keriann UesugiDivision of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois.
Lisa RomeroDivision of Reproductive Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia.
Olivia R SappenfieldDivision of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois.
Julia F HowlandDivision of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois.
Shanna CoxDivision of Reproductive Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, Georgia.

Funding

Intramural CDC HHS CC999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPrevious assessment of statewide policies on long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) indicate that an increasing number of states are implementing policies specifically for provision immediately postpartum, supported by current clinical guidelines. Less is known about how state policies describe payment methodologies for the insertion procedure and device costs.

methodsWe conducted a systematic, web-based review of publicly available statewide policy language on immediate postpartum LARC among all 50 states. We examined the payor/s identified in the policy and policy type, if the policy included language on the global obstetric fee, whether providers and/or facilities were authorized to bill for procedure or device costs, and if the billing mechanism was identified as inpatient and/or outpatient services.

resultsThree-fourths of states (76%; n = 38) had statewide policies on immediate postpartum LARC. All policies identified Medicaid as the payor, although two also included non-Medicaid plans. Language allowing for reimbursement separate from the global obstetric fee for insertion procedures was present in 76% of states; 23 states permit it and 6 do not. Device cost reimbursement separate from the fee was identified in more state policies (92%); 31 states allow it and 4 do not. More policies included inpatient or outpatient billing mechanisms for device costs (82%; n = 31) than insertion procedures (50%; n = 19).

conclusionsMedicaid reimbursement policies for immediate postpartum LARC services vary by state reimbursement process, type, and mechanism. Observed differences indicate payment methodologies more often include the cost of the device than provider reimbursement (31 states vs. 23 states). Fewer than one-half of states offer reimbursement for provider insertion fees, a significant systems barrier to contraceptive access for women who choose LARC immediately postpartum.

Indexed as

Long-Acting Reversible ContraceptionContraceptionFemaleHealth PolicyHealth Services AccessibilityHumansMedicaidPostpartum PeriodPregnancyUnited States

Identifiers

PMID34602326
PMCPMC9198998

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.