Abortion clinic patients’ opinions about obtaining abortions from general women's health care providers

2010 ◽  
Vol 81 (3) ◽  
pp. 409-414 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tracy Ann Weitz ◽  
Kate Cockrill
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Women’S Health ◽  
Women's Health ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Women's Health Care ◽  
Abortion Clinic

scholarly journals Integrating evolution into medical education for women’s health care practitioners

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 (1) ◽  
pp. 60-67
Author(s):  
Michael L Power ◽  
Carrie Snead ◽  
Eda G Reed ◽  
Jay Schulkin
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Medical Education ◽  
Women’S Health ◽  
Women's Health ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Evolutionary Medicine ◽  
Evolutionary Perspective ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Female Reproduction ◽  
Women's Health Care

Abstract Evolution is a fundamental principle in biology; however, it has been neglected in medical education. We argue that an evolutionary perspective is especially important for women’s health care providers, as selection will act strongly on reproductive parameters, and the biological costs of female reproduction are generally more resource expensive than for men (e.g. due to gestation and lactation) with greater effects on health and wellbeing. An evolutionary perspective is needed to understand antibiotic resistance, disease and health risks associated with mismatches between our evolved adaptations and current conditions, the importance of the microbiome and the maternal role in how infants acquire and develop their early-life microbiome (vaginal birth, lactation), and the importance of breastmilk as a biochemical signal from mothers to their babies. We present data that obstetrician–gynecologists’ views regarding the inclusion of evolution within their training is generally positive, but many barriers are perceived. Requiring coursework in evolutionary biology with an emphasis on evolutionary medicine prior to enrollment in medical school may be a solution.

scholarly journals Determinants of rural-urban differences in health care provider visits among women of reproductive age in the United States

PLoS ONE ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (12) ◽  
pp. e0240700
Author(s):  
Hyunjung Lee ◽  
Ashley H. Hirai ◽  
Ching-Ching Claire Lin ◽  
John E. Snyder
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Women’S Health ◽  
Women's Health ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Rural Women ◽  
Reproductive Age ◽  
County Level ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Provider Type ◽  
Women Of Reproductive Age

Background Rural health disparities and access gaps may contribute to higher maternal and infant morbidity and mortality. Understanding and addressing access barriers for specialty women’s health services is important in mitigating risks for adverse childbirth events. The objective of this study was to investigate rural-urban differences in health care access for women of reproductive age by examining differences in past-year provider visit rates by provider type, and quantifying the contributing factors to these findings. Methods and findings Using a nationally-representative sample of reproductive age women (n = 37,026) from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (2010–2015) linked to the Area Health Resource File, rural-urban differences in past-year office visit rates with health care providers were examined. Blinder-Oaxaca decomposition analysis quantified the portion of disparities explained by individual- and county-level sociodemographic and provider supply characteristics. Overall, there were no rural-urban differences in past-year visits with women’s health providers collectively (65.0% vs 62.4%), however differences were observed by provider type. Rural women had lower past-year obstetrician-gynecologist (OB-GYN) visit rates than urban women (23.3% vs. 26.6%), and higher visit rates with family medicine physicians (24.3% vs. 20.9%) and nurse practitioners/physician assistants (NPs/PAs) (24.6% vs. 16.1%). Lower OB-GYN availability in rural versus urban counties (6.1 vs. 13.7 providers/100,000 population) explained most of the rural disadvantage in OB-GYN visit rates (83.8%), and much of the higher family physician (80.9%) and NP/PA (50.1%) visit rates. Other individual- and county-level characteristics had smaller effects on rural-urban differences. Conclusion Although there were no overall rural-urban differences in past-year visit rates, the lower OB-GYN availability in rural areas appears to affect the types of health care providers seen by women. Whether rural women are receiving adequate specialized women’s health care services, while seeing a different cadre of providers, warrants further investigation and has particular relevance for women experiencing high-risk pregnancies and deliveries.

scholarly journals Knowledge, Attitudes, and PrEP Prescribing Practices of Health Care Providers in Philadelphia, PA

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 215013271987852 ◽  
Author(s):  
Margaret R. Carter ◽  
Erika Aaron ◽  
Tanner Nassau ◽  
Kathleen A. Brady
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Women’S Health ◽  
Women's Health ◽  
Health Care Providers ◽  
Primary Care Providers ◽  
Hiv Care ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Prescribing Practices ◽  
Biomedical Intervention

Introduction: Preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is an effective biomedical intervention that has the potential to dramatically decrease the incidence of HIV but remains an underutilized method of HIV prevention. The Philadelphia Department of Public Health administered an online survey to health care providers in the Philadelphia area with the aim of characterizing PrEP attitudes, knowledge, and prescribing practices. Methods: Online surveys were distributed to 1000 providers who were recruited through distribution lists of Philadelphia medical providers between September and December 2017. A Likert-type response scale was utilized to analyze participant self-reported responses. Participant practice settings included HIV/ID, family and internal medicine, women’s health, and pediatric/adolescent clinics. Results and Discussion: The response rate of the survey was 9%. Of 81 complete responses, 75% (N = 61) felt comfortable providing PrEP and 77% (N = 62) had ever written a PrEP prescription. Compared with primary care providers, HIV care providers were significantly more knowledgeable about required laboratory testing for prescribing PrEP ( P = .03) and were more likely to have prescribed PrEP to more than 10 patients ( P = .006). Women’s health and pediatric providers reported feeling less comfortable providing PrEP to their patients ( P = .0003). Conclusion: The majority of health care providers in the Philadelphia area who responded to the survey reported experience with providing PrEP to their patients. In the present study, HIV care providers were significantly more comfortable and knowledgeable about prescribing PrEP compared with providers in primary care, women’s health, and/or adolescent/pediatric medicine. Results were limited by sampling bias, as providers who responded to the survey may have prior experience with PrEP. Future Health Department educational trainings need to target primary and preventive care providers, providers who have never prescribed PrEP, and providers who see few patients living with HIV.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document