Publications

BACKGROUND: 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.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to describe the literature on pregnancy care utilization, experiences, and outcomes of undocumented individuals in the United States.

METHODS: 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.

RESULTS: 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.

CONCLUSIONS: 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.

Insurance coverage for prenatal care, labor and delivery care, and postpartum care for undocumented immigrants consists of a patchwork of state and federal policies, which varies widely by state. According to federal law, states must provide coverage for labor and delivery through Emergency Medicaid. Various states have additional prenatal and postpartum coverage for undocumented immigrants through policy mechanisms such as the Children's Health Insurance Program's "unborn child" option, expansion of Medicaid, and independent state-level mechanisms. Using a search of state Medicaid and federal government websites, we found that 27 states and the District of Columbia provide additional coverage for prenatal care, postpartum care, or both, while 23 states do not. Twelve states include any postpartum coverage; 7 provide coverage for 12 months postpartum. Although information regarding coverage is available publicly online, there exist many barriers to access, such as lack of transparency, lack of availability of information in multiple languages, and incorrect information. More inclusive and easily accessible policies are needed as the first step toward improving maternal health among undocumented immigrants, a population trapped in a complicated web of immigration policy and a maternal health crisis. (Am J Public Health. 2024;114(10):1051-1060. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2024.307750).

OBJECTIVE: To measure what patients with Spanish language preference and limited English proficiency value most when selecting a prenatal care clinician.

METHODS: A discrete choice experiment was administered at two large academic medical centers in Boston, Massachusetts. Participants were identified by electronic medical record, had preferred Spanish language and self-identified limited English proficiency, and either were pregnant with a completed fetal anatomy scan or had given birth within the past 12 months at the time of the study. The discrete choice experiment consisted of eight attributes to consider when selecting a prenatal care clinician: clinician Spanish proficiency, type of interpreter used, interpersonal dynamics (ie, making patients feel seen, heard, and cared for), cultural concordance, continuity of care, shared decision making, distance from home, and wait times for appointments. Descriptive statistics of demographic variables were calculated. Hierarchical Bayesian models were used to analyze discrete choice experiment data.

RESULTS: The attributes that were most important to 166 participants when choosing their prenatal care clinician were interpersonal dynamics within the patient-clinician dyad and clinician Spanish language proficiency (average importance 21.4/100 and 20.8/100, respectively). Of lowest importance were wait time to receive an appointment and continuity of care (average importance 5.1 and 6.1, respectively). Although participants highly preferred that their clinician be "fluent or near fluent in Spanish," the second most preferred option was having a clinician with only basic Spanish proficiency rather than a more advanced level of Spanish proficiency with some misunderstandings.

CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrates the importance of positive clinician-patient interpersonal dynamics and language-concordant care for patients with Spanish language preference in prenatal care. Promoting equitable patient-centered care for patients with limited English proficiency requires responding to preferences regarding clinician language proficiency and demonstrating attentiveness, empathy, and concern for prenatal care experiences.

BACKGROUND: While the Liaison Committee on Medical Education emphasizes the teaching of cultural competence in medical education, the concept of cultural humility, focusing on self-reflection and lifelong learning, has been proposed as a more effective approach. Although there have been numerous discussions on both topics, understanding how faculty in clinical settings help students develop cultural humility skills remains limited.

OBJECTIVE: Our multimethod study utilized a survey and semi-structured interviews to identify strategies that faculty at one institution use to help students develop cultural humility skills.

METHODS: We administered a 10-question survey to assess faculty demographics, teaching characteristics, and familiarity with cultural humility. Participants most familiar with cultural humility were invited for semi-structured interviews. Survey data were analyzed with descriptive statistics, and interview data were thematically analyzed to identify key teaching strategies.

RESULTS: In our study of 49 medical faculty members, the majority of participants were female (61%) and predominantly White (67%), covering a wide range of specialties and years of teaching. Of the participants, 74% expressed being at least somewhat familiar with cultural humility, and 10 consented to interviews. Strategies for cultural humility education included one-on-one instruction, feedback, and reflections. Thematic analysis underscored fostering learner curiosity about cultures, early patient exposure, and incorporating diverse learning perspectives as essential in developing students' cultural humility skills.

CONCLUSION: Cultural humility is an important attribute for healthcare professionals that can enhance patient-centered care. Through focused interviews with faculty in our study and subsequent thematic analysis, our results suggest the need for longitudinal and multimodal educational strategies to cultivate cultural humility among medical students. By understanding current teaching methods, educators can design and assess more effective curricula to prepare future doctors for a culturally diverse patient population.

Despite increasing cesarean rates in Africa, there remain extensive gaps in the standard provision of care after cesarean birth. We present recommendations for discharge instructions to be provided to women following cesarean delivery in Rwanda, particularly rural Rwanda, and with consideration of adaptable guidelines for sub-Saharan Africa, to support recovery during the postpartum period. These guidelines were developed by a Technical Advisory Group comprised of clinical, program, policy, and research experts with extensive knowledge of cesarean care in Africa. The final instructions delineate between normal and abnormal recovery symptoms and advise when to seek care. The instructions align with global postpartum care guidelines, with additional emphasis on care practices more common in the region and address barriers that women delivering via cesarean may encounter in Africa. The recommended timeline of postpartum visits and visit activities reflect the World Health Organization protocols and provide additional activities to support women who give birth via cesarean. These guidelines aim to standardize communication with women at the time of discharge after cesarean birth in Africa, with the goal of improved confidence and clinical outcomes among these individuals.

OBJECTIVE: To assess trends in childbirth at a hospital-birth center among women living in Compañeros En Salud (CES)-affiliated communities in Chiapas, Mexico and explore barriers to childbirth care. Our hypothesis was that despite interventions to support and incentivize childbirth at the hospital-birth center, the proportion of births at the hospital-birth center among women from Compañeros En Salud-affiliated communities has not significantly changed after two years. We suspected that this may be due to structural factors impacting access to care and/or perceptions of care impacting desire to deliver at the birth center.

DESIGN: This explanatory mixed-methods study included a retrospective Compañeros En Salud maternal health census review followed by quantitative surveys and semi-structured qualitative interviews.

PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: Participants were women living in municipalities in the mountainous Sierra Madre region of Chiapas, Mexico who received prenatal care in one of 10 community clinics served by Compañeros En Salud. Participants were recruited if they gave birth anywhere other than the primary-level rural hospital and adjacent birth center supported by Compañeros En Salud, either at home or at other facilities.

MEASUREMENTS: We compared rates of birth at the hospital-birth center, other health facilities, and at home from 2017-2018. We conducted surveys and interviews with women who gave birth between January 2017-July 2018 at home or at facilities other than the hospital-birth center to understand perceptions of care and decision-making surrounding childbirth location.

FINDINGS: We found no significant difference in rates of overall number of women birthing at the hospital-birth center from Compañeros En Salud-affiliated communities between 2017 and 2018 (p=0.36). Analysis of 158 surveys revealed distance (30.4%), time (27.8%), and costs (25.9%) as reasons for not birthing at the hospital-birth center. From 27 interviews, negative perceptions and experiences of the hospital included low-quality and disrespectful care, low threshold for medical interventions, and harm and suffering. Partners or family members influenced most decisions about childbirth location.

KEY CONCLUSIONS: Interventions to minimize logistical barriers may not be sufficient to overcome distance and perceptions of low-quality, disrespectful care.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Better understanding of complex decision-making around childbirth will guide Compañeros En Salud in developing interventions to further meet the needs and preferences of birthing women in rural Chiapas.

BACKGROUND: Public health and clinical recommendations are established from systematic reviews and retrospective meta-analyses combining effect sizes, traditionally, from aggregate data and more recently, using individual participant data (IPD) of published studies. However, trials often have outcomes and other meta-data that are not defined and collected in a standardized way, making meta-analysis problematic. IPD meta-analysis can only partially fix the limitations of traditional, retrospective, aggregate meta-analysis; prospective meta-analysis further reduces the problems.

METHODS: We developed an initiative including seven clinical intervention studies of balanced energy-protein (BEP) supplementation during pregnancy and/or lactation that are being conducted (or recently concluded) in Burkina Faso, Ethiopia, India, Nepal, and Pakistan to test the effect of BEP on infant and maternal outcomes. These studies were commissioned after an expert consultation that designed recommendations for a BEP product for use among pregnant and lactating women in low- and middle-income countries. The initiative goal is to harmonize variables across studies to facilitate IPD meta-analyses on closely aligned data, commonly called prospective meta-analysis. Our objective here is to describe the process of harmonizing variable definitions and prioritizing research questions. A two-day workshop of investigators, content experts, and advisors was held in February 2020 and harmonization activities continued thereafter. Efforts included a range of activities from examining protocols and data collection plans to discussing best practices within field constraints. Prior to harmonization, there were many similar outcomes and variables across studies, such as newborn anthropometry, gestational age, and stillbirth, however, definitions and protocols differed. As well, some measurements were being conducted in several but not all studies, such as food insecurity. Through the harmonization process, we came to consensus on important shared variables, particularly outcomes, added new measurements, and improved protocols across studies.

DISCUSSION: We have fostered extensive communication between investigators from different studies, and importantly, created a large set of harmonized variable definitions within a prospective meta-analysis framework. We expect this initiative will improve reporting within each study in addition to providing opportunities for a series of IPD meta-analyses.

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.

Reproductive coercion extends from a historical context in which the obstetrics and gynecology profession has interfered with the reproductive and bodily autonomy of immigrants. We provide illustrative examples of historical and contemporary immigration policies that allow mechanisms of reproductive control to persist within the immigration detention system. We end by compelling obstetrician-gynecologists to act as agents of change by leveraging their social, economic, and political power to resist and eliminate structures and norms that enable reproductive oppression of immigrant groups in detention.