9
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Accessibility of federally funded family planning services in South Carolina and Alabama

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Highlights

          • Scores of access measure contraceptive care accessibility across five dimensions.

          • Differences in access exist between safety-net clinic type in South Carolina and Alabama.

          • Gaps within each dimension of access suggest data driven policy interventions.

          Abstract

          This study operationalized the five dimensions of health care access in the context of contraceptive service provision and used this framework to examine access to contraceptive care at health department (HD) (Title X funded) and federally qualified health center (FQHC) (primarily non-Title X funded) clinics in South Carolina and Alabama. A cross-sectional survey was conducted in 2017/18 that assessed clinic-level characteristics, policies, and practices related to contraceptive provision. Provision of different contraceptive methods was examined between clinic types. Survey items were mapped to the dimensions of access and internal consistency for each scale was tested with Cronbach’s alpha. Scores of access were developed and differences by clinic type were evaluated with an independent t-test. The overall response rate was 68.3% and the sample included 235 clinics. HDs (96.9%) were significantly more likely to provide IUDs and/or Impants on-site than FQHCs (37.4%) ( P < 0.0001). Scales with the highest consistency were Availability: Clinical Policy (24 items) (alpha = 0.892) and Acceptability (43 items) (alpha = 0.834). HDs had higher access scores than FQHCs for the Availability: Clinical Policy scale (0.58, 95% CL 0.55, 0.61) vs (0.29, 95% CL 0.25, 0.33) and Affordability: Administrative Policy scale (0.86, 95% CL 0.83, 0.90) vs (0.47, 95% CL 0.41, 0.53). FQHCs had higher access scores than HDs for Affordability: Insurance Policy (0.78, 95% CL 0.72, 0.84) vs (0.56, 95% CL 0.53, 0.59). These findings highlight strengths and gaps in contraceptive care access. Future studies must examine the impact of each dimension of access on clinic-level contraceptive utilization.

          Related collections

          Most cited references18

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Patient-centred access to health care: conceptualising access at the interface of health systems and populations

          Background Access is central to the performance of health care systems around the world. However, access to health care remains a complex notion as exemplified in the variety of interpretations of the concept across authors. The aim of this paper is to suggest a conceptualisation of access to health care describing broad dimensions and determinants that integrate demand and supply-side-factors and enabling the operationalisation of access to health care all along the process of obtaining care and benefiting from the services. Methods A synthesis of the published literature on the conceptualisation of access has been performed. The most cited frameworks served as a basis to develop a revised conceptual framework. Results Here, we view access as the opportunity to identify healthcare needs, to seek healthcare services, to reach, to obtain or use health care services, and to actually have a need for services fulfilled. We conceptualise five dimensions of accessibility: 1) Approachability; 2) Acceptability; 3) Availability and accommodation; 4) Affordability; 5) Appropriateness. In this framework, five corresponding abilities of populations interact with the dimensions of accessibility to generate access. Five corollary dimensions of abilities include: 1) Ability to perceive; 2) Ability to seek; 3) Ability to reach; 4) Ability to pay; and 5) Ability to engage. Conclusions This paper explains the comprehensiveness and dynamic nature of this conceptualisation of access to care and identifies relevant determinants that can have an impact on access from a multilevel perspective where factors related to health systems, institutions, organisations and providers are considered with factors at the individual, household, community, and population levels.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The concept of access: definition and relationship to consumer satisfaction.

            Access is an important concept in health policy and health services research, yet it is one which has not been defined or employed precisely. To some authors "access" refers to entry into or use of the health care system, while to others it characterizes factors influencing entry or use. The purpose of this article is to propose a taxonomic definition of "access." Access is presented here as a general concept that summarizes a set of more specific dimensions describing the fit between the patient and the health care system. The specific dimensions are availability, accessibility, accommodation, affordability and acceptability. Using interview data on patient satisfaction, the discriminant validity of these dimensions is investigated. Results provide strong support for the view that differentiation does exist among the five areas and that the measures do relate to the phenomena with which they are identified.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Challenging unintended pregnancy as an Indicator of reproductive autonomy

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Prev Med Rep
                Preventive Medicine Reports
                2211-3355
                07 March 2021
                June 2021
                07 March 2021
                : 22
                : 101343
                Affiliations
                [a ]Center for Applied Research and Evaluation in Women's Health, Department of Health Services Management & Policy, College of Public Health, East Tennessee State University, P.O. Box 70264, Johnson City, TN 37614, United States
                [b ]Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, College of Public Health, East Tennessee State University, 149 Lamb Hall, P.O. Box 70259, Johnson City, TN 37614, United States
                Author notes
                [* ]Corresponding author. beattyk@ 123456etsu.edu
                Article
                S2211-3355(21)00034-6 101343
                10.1016/j.pmedr.2021.101343
                7980054
                69ca8571-5fcd-401a-b82b-535c9fe4b8e0
                © 2021 The Authors

                This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

                History
                : 16 July 2020
                : 12 February 2021
                : 20 February 2021
                Categories
                Regular Article

                contraceptive agents,dimensions of access,health services accessibility,family planning services,policy,safety-net providers,title x

                Comments

                Comment on this article