The impact of out-of-pocket expense on IUD utilization among women with private insurance

Contraception

Volumn 84, Issue 6, 2011, Pages

  Gariepy, Aileen M ^a   Simon, Erica J ^b   Patel, Divya A ^a   Creinin, Mitchell D ^c,d,e,f   Schwarz, Eleanor B ^c,d,e  

^a YALE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA COLLEGE OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH   (United States)

^e UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH GRADUATE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

^f UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Contraception; Insurance; IUD; Out of pocket expense

Indexed keywords

COPPER; LEVONORGESTREL;

ADULT; ARTICLE; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE UTILIZATION; HUMAN; INTRAUTERINE CONTRACEPTIVE DEVICE; PRIVATE HEALTH INSURANCE; URBAN AREA;

ACADEMIC MEDICAL CENTERS; ADULT; COHORT STUDIES; FEMALE; FINANCING, PERSONAL; HEALTH EXPENDITURES; HUMANS; INSURANCE COVERAGE; INSURANCE, HEALTH; INTRAUTERINE DEVICES; INTRAUTERINE DEVICES, COPPER; INTRAUTERINE DEVICES, MEDICATED; MEDICAL RECORDS; PATIENT ACCEPTANCE OF HEALTH CARE; PHILADELPHIA; PRIVATE SECTOR; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; URBAN HEALTH;

EID: 81155150091     PISSN: 00107824     EISSN: 18790518     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.contraception.2011.07.002     Document Type: Article

References (13)

1. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Increasing use of contraceptive implants and intrauterine devices to reduce unintended pregnancy. ACOG Committee Opinion No. 450 Obstet Gynecol 114 2009 1434 1438
2. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Intrauterine device. ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 59 Obstet Gynecol 105 2005 223 232
3. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Intrauterine device and adolescents, ACOG Committee Opinion No. 392 Obstet Gynecol 110 2007 1493 1495
4. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention U.S. medical eligibility criteria for contraceptive use, 2010 MMWR 59 No. RR-4 2010 1 88
5. C.F. Chiou, J. Trussell, and E. Reyes Economic analysis of contraceptives for women Contraception 68 2003 3 10 (Pubitemid 37271984)
6. D.G. Foster, D.P. Rostovtseva, C.D. Brindis, M.A. Biggs, D. Hulett, and P.D. Darney Cost savings from the provision of specific methods of contraception in a publicly funded program Am J Public Health 99 2009 446 451
7. J. Trussell, A.M. Lalla, Q.V. Doan, E. Reyes, L. Pinto, and J. Gricar Cost-effectiveness of contraceptives in the United States Contraception 79 2009 5 14
8. W.D. Mosher, and J. Jones Use of contraception in the United States: 1982-2008. Vital and Health Statistics Series 23, No. 29 2010 National Center for Health Statistics Hyattsville, MD
9. M.L. Kavanaugh, J. Jerman, D. Hubacher, K. Kost, and L.B. Finer Characteristics of women in the United States who use long-acting reversible contraceptive methods Obstet Gynecol 117 2011 1349 1357
10. D. Postlethwaite, J. Trussell, A. Zoolakis, R. Shabear, and D. Petitti A comparison of contraceptive procurement pre- and post-benefit change Contraception 76 2007 360 365 (Pubitemid 47610761)
11. G.M. Secura, J.E. Allsworth, and T. Madden The Contraceptive CHOICE Project: reducing barriers to long-acting reversible contraception Am J Obstet Gynecol 203 2010 115
12. Testimony of Guttmacher Institute Submitted to the Committee on Preventive Services for Women, Institute of Medicine, January 12, 2011 Available at http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/CPSW-testimony.pdf
13. J. Trussell Update on the cost-effectiveness of contraceptives in the United States Contraception 82 2010 391