ArticleWomen's health reports (New Rochelle, N.Y.)2024
Outcomes for Women Denied Postpartum Tubal Ligation During the Initial COVID-19 Surge.
Article in Women's health reports (New Rochelle, N.Y.), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical characteristics and influencing factors of adverse outcomes following clinical pregnancy after laparoscopic tubal anastomosis.Annals of medicine · 2025Article
- Expanding access to postpartum contraception.Current opinion in obstetrics & gynecology · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the utilization and outcomes of postpartum long-acting reversible contraception (PPLARC) following unmet postpartum bilateral tubal ligation (PPBTL) requests during a time in which elective surgeries were canceled due to the initial COVID-19 surge. Methods: We conducted a mixed-methods study using an embedded design. Using a retrospective cohort design, we collected data from patients seeking PPBTL following vaginal delivery between March 15, 2020, and June 20, 2020; this reflects a time period during which elective surgery was canceled thus making PPBTL unavailable. We recorded demographic data, method of contraception at time of discharge and 18 months postpartum, and incidence of interval pregnancy at 18 months postpartum. Additionally, we conducted five semistructured interviews to gain deeper insights into patient experiences with PPLARC as a bridge method. Results: Forty-five patients had unfilled PPBTL requests with follow-up data available for 35. The median age was 34 years. Ten (22%) accepted PPLARC as a bridge to interval bilateral tubal ligation (BTL). At the 18-month mark, only 1 out of 7 (14.3%) PPLARC users had undergone an interval BTL procedure, compared to 11 out of 28 (39.3%) nonusers. None of the PPLARC users experienced pregnancies, while 6 out of 28 (21.6%) nonusers became pregnant. Qualitative interviews underscored themes such as inadequate counseling preparation for unmet PPBTL requests and persistent barriers to BTL access. Conclusions: Raising awareness of unmet PPBTL risks may drive greater adoption of PPLARC as a bridge method. While not a substitution for PPTBL, PPLARC provides a reliable form of interval contraception for patients seeking to delay pregnancy. It is essential to recognize that patient security with PPLARC's contraceptive efficacy may introduce delays in achieving the desired interval sterilization. Enhancing antenatal counseling on contraception options and providing transparency regarding barriers to sterilization could mitigate the challenges associated with unmet PPBTL requests.
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.