Brittany L. Ranchoff

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effects of hospital obstetric unit closures on travel time to the nearest hospital-based obstetric services. METHODS: The 2010–2021 American Hospital Association Annual Survey and Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Provider of Services files were used to determine hospital-based obstetric service availability between 2010 and 2021 and classified counties into three categories: 1) never had in-county obstetric services, 2) had continual in-county obstetric services, and 3) lost all in-county obstetric services. Our unit of analysis was census tracts, and county-level obstetric service availability defined our independent variable. Our sample included 60,516 tracts (726,192 tract-years) across 3,033 continental U.S. counties. We compared tracts in counties that lost all obstetric services between 2010 and 2021 with tracts in counties with continual services between 2010 and 2021 (primary control group). Our outcome was travel time in minutes from tract centroids to the nearest obstetric services. To evaluate changes in travel time after obstetric unit closures, we used a staggered difference-in-differences study design by using the Callaway and Sant'Anna difference-in-differences model, overall and by rurality. RESULTS: Overall, 2.7% of tracts were in a county that lost all hospital-based obstetric services between 2010 and 2021, 89.2% were in a county with continual obstetric services, and 8.2% were in a county that never had obstetric services between 2010 and 2021. The unadjusted and adjusted models generated comparable results, showing that obstetric unit closures were associated with a significant increase of 13.8 minutes (95% CI, 13.1–14.4) on average in travel time to the nearest obstetric hospital. Travel time increased more in rural than urban areas (16.9 minutes [95% CI, 15.9–17.8] versus 10.3 minutes [95% CI, 9.4–11.1]). CONCLUSION: After hospital obstetric unit closures, travel time to the nearest obstetric services increased, especially in rural areas. The increased travel time presents a barrier to obstetric care because almost all U.S. births occur in hospitals.

Objective: To examine the association of Massachusetts Medicaid Accountable Care Organization (ACO) implementation with changes in mental health care utilization in the postpartum period.Study Setting and Design: We examine care for people with a birth covered by Medicaid or private insurance. We used a difference‐in‐differences design to compare differences before and after Medicaid ACO implementation for those with Medicaid versus those with private insurance. The primary outcome was a binary measure of having at least one outpatient mental health care visit in the 6 months postpartum. We estimated linear probability models controlling for age, prenatal mental illness, pregnancy complications, birth mode, and ZIP code characteristics.Data Sources and Analytic Sample: Data are from the Massachusetts All‐Payer Claims Database. The analytic sample included Massachusetts residents with a live birth between July 1, 2016, and September 30, 2019, with complete data.Principal Findings: 107,813 births were included (53.0% Medicaid, 47.0% private). 7.8% of these had at least one outpatient mental health visit in the 6 months postpartum, with similar rates among those with Medicaid versus those with private insurance pre‐ACO implementation (7.9% Medicaid versus 7.7% private). An increase in utilization among privately insured individuals and a decrease among Medicaid beneficiaries post‐ACO implementation was observed. Regression‐adjusted difference‐in‐differences estimates indicate that Medicaid ACO implementation was associated with a 1.3 percentage point [pp] decrease (95% confidence interval: 1.3 pp, −0.5 pp; p < 0.01) in the probability of having an outpatient mental health visit for those with Medicaid.Conclusions: Medicaid ACO implementation was associated with decreases in use of outpatient mental health care in the postpartum period among people with Medicaid, overall and compared to those with private insurance. Future research should determine whether this increased disparity in mental health care utilization persists with maturation of the ACO delivery model.

Changes in health insurance coverage may disrupt access to and continuity of care, even for those who remain insured. Continuity of care is especially important in schizophrenia, which requires ongoing medical and pharmaceutical treatment. However, little is known about continuity of insurance coverage among those with schizophrenia. The objective was to examine the probability of insurance transitions for individuals with schizophrenia who were continuously insured and whether this varied across insurance types. The Massachusetts All-Payer Claims Database identified individuals with schizophrenia aged 18–64 who were continuously insured during a two-year period between 2014 and 2018. A logistic regression estimated the association of having an insurance transition – defined as having a change in insurance type – with insurance type at the start of the period, adjusting for age, sex, ZIP code in the lowest quartile of median income, and ZIP code with concentrated poverty. Overall, 15.1% had at least one insurance transition across a 24-month period. Insurance transitions were most frequent among those with plans from the Marketplace. In regression adjusted results, individuals covered by the traditional Medicaid program were 20.2 percentage points [pp] (95% confidence interval [CI]: 24.6 pp, 15.9 pp) less likely to have an insurance transition than those who were insured by a Marketplace plan. Insurance transitions among individuals with schizophrenia were common, with more than one in six people having at least one transition in insurance type during a two-year period. Given that even continuously insured individuals with schizophrenia commonly experience insurance transitions, attention to insurance transitions as a barrier to care access and continuity is warranted.

IntroductionContinuity of care with an individual clinician is associated with increased satisfaction and better outcomes. Continuity of clinician type (ie, obstetrician-gynecologist or midwife) may also impact care experiences; however, it is unknown how common it is to experience discontinuity of clinician type and what its implications are for the birth experience. We aimed to identify characteristics associated with having a different clinician type for prenatal care than for birth and to compare intrapartum experiences by continuity of clinician type.MethodsFor this cross-sectional study, data were from the 2017 Listening to Mothers in California survey. The analytic sample was limited to individuals with vaginal births who had midwifery or obstetrician-gynecologist prenatal care (N = 1384). Bivariate and multivariate analysis examined characteristics of individuals by continuity of clinician type. We then examined associations of clinician type continuity with intrapartum care experiences.ResultsOverall, 74.4% of individuals had the same type of clinician for prenatal care and birth. Of individuals with midwifery prenatal care, 45.1% had a different birth clinician type, whereas 23.5% of individuals who had obstetrician-gynecologist prenatal care had a different birth clinician type. Continuity of clinician type was positively associated with having had a choice of perinatal care clinician. There were no statistically significant associations between clinician type continuity and intrapartum care experiences.DiscussionFindings suggest individuals with midwifery prenatal care frequently have a different type of clinician attend their birth, even among those with vaginal births. Further research should examine the impact of multiple dimensions of continuity of care on perinatal care quality.

Objectives: Person-centered care has been increasingly recognized as an important aspect of health care quality, including in maternity care. Little is known about correlates and outcomes of person-centered care in maternity care in the United States. Materials and Methods: Data were from a prospective cohort of more than 3000 individuals who gave birth to a first baby in a Pennsylvania hospital. Person-centered maternity care was measured via a 13-item rating scale administered 1-month postpartum. Content validity was established through exploratory factor analysis. The resulting scale had scores ranging from 13 to 54, with Cronbach's alpha of 0.86. Using linear and logistic regression models to control for covariates, we examined associations between participants' characteristics and person-centered maternity care and between person-centered maternity care and postpartum outcomes. Results: Participants had a mean total score of 47.80 on the person-centered maternity care scale. Patient factors independently associated with more person-centered maternity care included older age, more positive attitude toward vaginal birth during pregnancy, and spontaneous vaginal birth. In adjusted models, higher person-centered maternity scale scores were strongly associated with many positive physical and mental health outcomes at 1 and 6 months postpartum. Conclusions: Our findings underscore the importance of person-centered maternity not just due to its intrinsic value but also because it may be associated with both mental and physical health outcomes through the postpartum period. Results suggest that policy efforts are necessary to ensure person-centered maternity care, especially for delivery hospitalization experience.

Objective: Postpartum visits are an important opportunity to address ongoing maternal health. Experiences of discrimination in healthcare can impact healthcare use, including postpartum visits. However, it is unknown whether discrimination is associated with postpartum visit content. This study aimed to examine the relationship between perceived discrimination during the childbirth hospitalization and postpartum visit attendance and content. Research design: Data were from Listening to Mothers in California, a population-based survey of people with a singleton hospital birth in California in 2016. Adjusted logistic regression models estimated the association between perceived discrimination during the childbirth hospitalization and 1) postpartum visit attendance, and 2) topics addressed at the postpartum visit (birth control, depression and breastfeeding) for those who attended. Results: 90.6% of women attended a postpartum visit, and 8.6% reported discrimination during the childbirth hospitalization. In adjusted models, any discrimination and insurance-based discrimination were associated with 7 and 10 percentage point (pp) lower predicted probabilities of attending a postpartum visit, respectively. There was a 7pp lower predicted probability of discussing birth control for women who had experienced discrimination (81% vs. 88%), a 15pp lower predicted probability of being asked about depression (64% vs. 79%), and a 9 pp lower predicted probability of being asked about breastfeeding (57% vs. 66%). Conclusions: Amid heightened attention to the importance of postpartum care, there is a need to better understand determinants of postpartum care quality. Our findings highlight the potential consequences of healthcare discrimination in the perinatal period, including lower quality of postpartum care.

Background: Many programs designed to improve feedback to students focus on faculty’s ability to provide a safe learning environment, and specific, actionable suggestions for improvement. Little attention has been paid to improving students’ attitudes and skills in accepting and responding to feedback effectively. Effective “real-time” feedback in the clinical setting is dependent on both the skill of the teacher and the learner’s ability to receive the feedback. Medical students entering their clinical clerkships are not formally trained in receiving feedback, despite the significant amount of feedback received during this time. Methods: We developed and implemented a one-hour workshop to teach medical students strategies for effectively receiving and responding to “real-time” (formative) feedback in the clinical environment. Subjective confidence and skill in receiving real-time feedback were assessed in pre- and post-workshop surveys. Objective performance of receiving feedback was evaluated before and after the workshop using a simulated feedback encounter designed to re-create common clinical and cognitive pitfalls for medical students, called an objective structured teaching exercise (OSTE). Results: After a single workshop, students self-reported increased confidence (mean 6.0 to 7.4 out of 10, P< 0.01) and skill (mean 6.0 to 7.0 out of 10, P=0.10). Compared to pre-workshop OSTE scores, post-workshop OSTE scores objectively measuring skill in receiving feedback were also significantly higher (mean 28.8 to 34.5 out of 40, P=0.0131). Conclusion: A one-hour workshop dedicated to strategies in receiving real-time feedback may improve effective feedback reception as well as self-perceived skill and confidence in receiving feedback. Providing strategies to trainees to improve their ability to effectively receive feedback may be a high-yield approach to both strengthen the power of feedback in the clinical environment and enrich the clinical experience of the medical student.

Introduction: Studies have linked midwifery practice laws to the availability of midwives but have generally not related workforce data to potential demand for reproductive health services. We examined state regulatory structure for midwives and its relationship to midwifery distribution and vital statistics data at the state and county level.Methods: Midwifery distribution data came from the Area Health Resources Files, distribution of women of reproductive age came from the US Census, and birth statistics came from US Natality Files from 2012 to 2016. Midwifery regulations were drawn from American College of Nurse‐Midwives Annual Reports. We used bivariate analysis to examine the relationship between state midwifery practice regulations and the number of midwives available in states and counties to potentially meet women's health care needs.Results: Twenty states and the District of Columbia had autonomous practice regulatory frameworks, whereas 24 states had collaborative practice regulatory frameworks during the years between 2012 and 2016. Six states changed regulations during that period. In 2016, the number of midwife‐attended births per number of midwives in a state was not related to the regulatory framework. However, states with autonomous frameworks had 2.2 times as many midwives per women of reproductive age (P < .0001) and 2.3 times as many midwives per total births when compared with states with collaborative statutory frameworks (P < .0001). At the county level, 70.1% of US counties had no midwife. Of those states with autonomous practice, only 59.7% of counties had no midwives, compared with 74.1% in states with collaborative models (P < .0001).Discussion: Midwives have the potential to help address the shortage of maternity and reproductive health service providers. Our research suggests that increasing the number of states with autonomous regulatory frameworks can be one way to expand access to care for women in the United States.