Search

Background: Disparities in obstetric care have been well documented, but disparities in the within-hospital population have not been as extensively explored. The objective is to assess cesarean delivery rate disparities at the hospital level in a nationally recognized low risk of cesarean delivery group., Methods: An observational study using a national population-based database, Nationwide Inpatient Sample, from 2008 to 2011 was conducted. All patients with nulliparous, term, singleton, vertex pregnancies from Black and White patients were included. The primary outcome was delivery mode (cesarean vs vaginal). The primary independent variable was race (Black vs White)., Results: A total of 1,064,351 patients were included and the overall nulliparous, term, singleton, and vertex pregnancies cesarean delivery rate was 14.1%. The within-hospital disparities of cesarean delivery rates were lower in minority-serving hospitals (OR: 1.20 95% CI: 1.12-1.28), rural hospitals (OR 1.11 95% CI: 1.02-1.20), and the South (OR 1.24 95% CI 1.19-1.30) compared to their respective counterparts. Non-minority serving hospitals (OR: 1.20 95% CI 0.12-1.25), and urban hospitals (OR1.32 95% CI 1.28-1.37), the Northeast (OR 1.41 95% CI 1.30-1.53) or West (OR 1.52 95% CI 1.38-1.67), had higher within-hospital racial disparities of cesarean delivery rates. The odds ratios reported are comparing within-hospital cesarean delivery rates in Black and White patients., Discussion: Significant within-hospital disparities of cesarean delivery rates across hospitals highlight the importance of facility-level factors. Policies aimed at advancing health equity must address hospital-level drivers of disparities in addition to structural racism., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

There is growing evidence that language discordance between patients and their health care teams negatively affects quality of care, experience of care, and health outcomes, yet there is limited guidance on best practices for advancing equitable care for patients who have language barriers within obstetrics and gynecology. In this commentary, we present two cases of language-discordant care and a framework for addressing language as a critical lens for health inequities in obstetrics and gynecology, which includes a variety of clinical settings such as labor and delivery, perioperative care, outpatient clinics, and inpatient services, as well as sensitivity around reproductive health topics. The proposed framework explores drivers of language-related inequities at the clinician, health system, and societal level. We end with actionable recommendations for enhancing equitable care for patients experiencing language barriers. Because language and communication barriers undergird other structural drivers of inequities in reproductive health outcomes, we urge obstetrician-gynecologists to prioritize improving care for patients experiencing language barriers., Competing Interests: Financial Disclosure Caroline Mitchell reports that she and her institution received payment from Scynexis, Inc., and she received payment from Ferring Pharmaceuticals. The other authors did not report any potential conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Medical librarians collaborate with physicians and other healthcare professionals to improve the quality and accessibility of medical information, which includes assembling the best evidence to advance health equality through teaching and research. This column brings together brief cases highlighting the experiences and perspectives of medical librarians, educators, and healthcare professionals using their organizational, pedagogical, and information-analysis skills to advance health equality indexing.

Objective: To design an Obstetrics and Gynecology (OBGYN) residency elective in global health that meets ACGME standards and simultaneously promotes health equity., Design: A 4-week elective was established for US residents in a high-volume African district hospital that served as a site for OBGYN rotations for the national internship training program. Clear clinical, operative, and teaching requirements were delineated for US OBGYN residents. Resident formal didactic outputs were incorporated into the intern OBGYN curriculum. The program was evaluated through assessment of resident experience and contribution to local training, as well as assessment of intern competency in OBGYN., Setting: Scottish Livingstone Hospital, a public district hospital in Molepolole, Botswana., Participants: Second- to fourth-year OBGYN residents from US training programs, working with Batswana medical interns under on-site faculty supervision., Results: From May 2016 to June 2018, 18 residents from 9 US OBGYN residency programs participated in the elective. Under supervision, US residents performed 116 major and 77 minor gynecologic surgeries, and teach-assisted Batswana interns and medical officers in 76 cesarean deliveries. Residents led or contributed significantly to 25 didactic education sessions as part of the formal intern OBGYN curriculum. During this period, 24 Batswana interns rotated through the hospital's department of OBGYN, and all 24 trainees met required OBGYN competencies prior to completing their internship., Conclusions: Matching US resident demand for global health experiences to equitable global health programming while maintaining ACGME training guidelines poses a challenge to OBGYN residency training programs. This elective provides a model OBGYN global health elective that addresses host-identified needs, broadens residents' skills, and meets standards for postgraduate OBGYN training. Purposeful global health electives for US residents embedded in longitudinal programs provide an opportunity for residents to contribute to broader global health efforts that promote health equity., (Copyright © 2019 Association of Program Directors in Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

IntroductionReproductive injustices such as forced sterilization, preventable maternal morbidity and mortality, restricted access to family planning services, and policy-driven environmental violence undermine reproductive autonomy and health outcomes, with disproportionate impact on historically marginalized communities. However, curricula focused on reproductive justice (RJ) are lacking in medical education.MethodsWe designed a novel, interactive, case-based RJ curriculum for postclerkship medical students. This curriculum was created using published guidelines on best practices for incorporating RJ in medical education. The session included a prerecorded video on the history of RJ, an article, and four interactive cases. Students engaged in a 2-hour small-group session, discussing key learning points of each case. We evaluated the curriculum's impact with a pre- and postsurvey and focus group.ResultsSixty-eight students participated in this RJ curriculum in October 2020 and March 2021. Forty-one percent of them completed the presurvey, and 46% completed the postsurvey. Twenty-two percent completed both surveys. Ninety percent of respondents agreed that RJ was relevant to their future practice, and 87% agreed that participating in this session would impact their clinical practice. Most respondents (81%) agreed that more RJ content is needed. Focus group participants appreciated the case-based, interactive format and the intersectionality within the cases.DiscussionThis interactive curriculum is an innovative and effective way to teach medical students about RJ and its relevance to clinical practice. Walking alongside patients as they accessed reproductive health care in a case-based curriculum improved students' comfort and self-reported knowledge on several RJ topics.

Undocumented immigrants face many barriers in accessing pregnancy care, including language differences, implicit and explicit bias, limited or no insurance coverage, and fear about accessing services. With the national spotlight on maternal health inequities, the current literature on undocumented immigrants during pregnancy requires synthesis. We aimed to describe the literature on pregnancy care utilization, experiences, and outcomes of undocumented individuals in the United States. We performed a scoping review of original research studies in the United States that described the undocumented population specifically and examined pregnancy care utilization, experiences, and outcomes. Studies underwent title, abstract, and full-text review by two investigators. Data were extracted and synthesized using descriptive statistics and content analysis. A total of 5,940 articles were retrieved and 3,949 remained after de-duplication. After two investigators screened and reviewed the articles, 29 studies met inclusion criteria. The definition of undocumented individuals varied widely across studies. Of the 29 articles, 24 showed that undocumented status and anti-immigrant policies and rhetoric are associated with lower care utilization and worse pregnancy outcomes, while inclusive health care and immigration policies are associated with higher levels of prenatal and postnatal care utilization as well as better pregnancy outcomes. The small, heterogeneous literature on undocumented immigrants and pregnancy care is fraught with inconsistent definitions, precluding comparisons across studies. Despite areas in need of further research, the signal among published studies is that undocumented individuals experience variable access to pregnancy care, heightened fear and stress regarding their status during pregnancy, and worse outcomes compared with other groups, including documented immigrants. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: In the US, there are striking inequities in maternal health outcomes between racial and ethnic groups. Community-based organizations (CBOs) provide social support services that are critical in addressing the needs of clients of color during and after pregnancy. Methods: We conducted a descriptive, cross-sectional mixed methods study of CBOs in Greater Boston that provide social support services to pregnant and postpartum clients. In May–August 2020, we administered an online survey about organizational characteristics, client population, and services offered. In July–August 2020, we conducted semi-structured interviews focused on services provided, gaps in services, and the impact of structural racism on clients. We used descriptive statistics to characterize CBOs and services and used thematic analysis to extract themes from the qualitative data. Results: A total of 21 unique CBOs participated with 17 CBOs completing the survey and 14 participating in interviews. CBOs served between 10 and 35,000 pregnant and postpartum clients per year (median = 200), and about half (n = 8) focused their programming on pregnant and postpartum clients. The most significant gaps in social support services were housing and childcare. Respondents identified racism and lack of coordination among organizations as the two primary barriers to accessing social support. Discussion: CBOs face multiple challenges to providing social support to pregnant and postpartum clients of color, and significant gaps exist in the types of services currently provided. Improved coordination among CBOs and advocacy efforts to develop community-informed solutions are needed to reduce barriers to social support. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: While some medical indications for cesarean delivery are clear, subjective provider and patient factors contribute to the rising cesarean delivery rates and marked disparities between racial/ethnic groups. We aimed to determine the association between language preference and risk of primary cesarean delivery. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of nulliparous, term, singleton, vertex (NTSV) deliveries of patients over 18 years old from 2011–2016 at an academic medical center, supplemented with data from the Massachusetts Department of Public Health. We used modified Poisson regression with robust error variance to calculate risk ratios for cesarean delivery between patients with English language preference and other language preference, with secondary outcomes of Apgar score, maternal readmission, blood transfusion, and NICU admission. Results: Of the 11,298 patients included, 10.3% reported a preferred language other than English, including Mandarin and Cantonese (61.7%), Portuguese (9.7%), and Spanish (7.5%). The adjusted risk ratio for cesarean delivery among patients with a language preference other than English was 0.85 (95% CI 0.72–0.997; p = 0.046) compared to patients with English language preference. No significant differences in risk of secondary outcomes between English and other language preference were found. Discussion: After adjusting for confounders, this analysis demonstrates a decreased risk of cesarean delivery among women who do not have an English language preference at one institution. This disparity in cesarean delivery rates in an NTSV population warrants future research, raising the question of what clinical and social factors may be contributing to these lower cesarean delivery rates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]