ArticleFamily medicine2024
Block Scheduling for LARC in a Family Medicine Residency Program.
Article in Family medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Expanding Access to Contraceptive Services in a Family Medicine Residency Clinic: The Rapid Access to Contraception Clinic Model.Family medicine · 2024Article
- Teaching Women's Health in Family Medicine.Family medicine · 2024Article
- Review of Publicly Available State Reimbursement Policies for Removal and Reinsertion of Long-Acting Reversible Contraception.Open access journal of contraception · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesOnly 20% of family physicians report providing long-acting reversible contraception (LARC). Clinician-related barriers include confidence and comfort with LARC counseling and insertion/removal, and limited availability and uptake. Training during residency may address barriers and increase access/availability of LARC to support reproductive autonomy. We sought to determine the impact of block scheduling LARC clinics on resident comfort and confidence with LARC counseling and insertion/removal.
methodsLARC block schedules were established in a Midwest family medicine residency's primary clinic (FMC) and in a federally qualified health center rotation clinic. Baseline and end-of-study surveys, compared by Mann-Whitney U and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests, were used to assess comfort and confidence with counseling and inserting LARC. The number of LARC devices placed at the FMC were collected for the intervention year and the year prior.
resultsTwenty of 30 residents completed the baseline survey; 13 completed the end-of-study survey. At the group and individual levels, comfort increased for counseling on Levonorgestrel (LNG) intrauterine devices (IUDs) and for inserting implants and LNG IUDs. Individual comfort increased for copper IUDs. Resident willingness to recommend LARC increased, and more devices were placed during the intervention year than the year prior in the FMC (all: P<.05).
conclusionsBlock scheduling of LARC clinics was associated with increased residents' comfort and confidence with counseling and placement of implants (LNG IUDs) and with an increase in LARCs placed at one clinic. Changes to scheduling may be an effective educational strategy that may increase access/availability to LARC.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.