|
|
|
|
|
Angela Nannini, FNP, PhD, Bouve College, School of Nursing, Northeastern University, 106 Robinson Hall, Huntington Ave, Boston, MA 02115, 617-373-3112, a.nannini@neu.edu, Patricia Beares, MSW, Family Planning Program, MA Department of Public Health, 250 Washington St, 5th Floor, Boston, MA 02111, Wanda Barfield, MD, MPH, MA Department of Pubic Health, Bureau of Family and Community Health, 250 Washington St., 5th floor, Boston, MA 02111, Karen Edlund, RN, BSN, Bureau of Family and Community Health, Massachusetts Department of Public Health, 250 Washington Street, 5th floor, Boston, MA 02108, and Steven Evans, MPH, PELL Project, Boston University School of Public Health, 715 Albany St., Boston, MA 02118.
Short inter-pregnancy periods (IPPs), particularly < 6 months, are linked to poor perinatal outcomes. Some states have obtained Medicaid waivers to cover family planning services postpartum to address this issue. Our purpose is to create measures of short IPPs to enhance family planning needs assessment among 32 high-risk (poverty, STDs, teen pregnancy, etc.) communities in Massachusetts. Measuring IPPs will identify high-risk subpopulations, inform assessment of unmet needs, and help local family planning providers design population specific interventions. Using birth and fetal death certificates we linked pregnancy outcomes from 1998 to 2001 to determine IPPs. Short IPPs were defined as time in months (< 6 mo. or < 12 mo.) between the delivery of a live-birth or fetal death, to the beginning of the next pregnancy (as measured by LMP). We examined short IPPs for the state and by high-risk communities by maternal age, race, Hispanic ethnicity, and health insurance type. Statewide, 4.5% of women had IPPs <6 mo. and 9% had IPPs <12 mo. The proportion of short IPPs varied greatly among high-risk communities and among various population groups. Community-specific short IPPs varied for adolescents [< 6 mo. (2% to10%); <12 mo. (4.6% to 18.6%)], Hispanics [< 6mo. (2.5% to 7.7%); <12 mo. (7.0% to 13.0%)], and Medicaid [<6 mo. (4% to 7%); <12 mo. (7.2% to13.0%)]. These data demonstrate the importance of community-specific assessment and will be used as a benchmark for future state and community family planning program monitoring and evaluation.
Learning Objectives:
Keywords: Family Planning, Reproductive Health
Presenting author's disclosure statement:
I do not have any significant financial interest/arrangement or affiliation with any organization/institution whose products or services are being discussed in this session.