Nantume A, Leong-Bob K, Hanson OR, Baayd J, Wilson C, Gero A, Tao KW, Simmons RG, Smid MC, Johnson EP, Metz TD, Watt MH, Cohen SR
Cite this paper
For EndNote, Zotero or Mendeley:
Open access
No open license is recorded for this paper. Reuse terms are set by the publisher.
Open Access
Free full text on PubMed Central (PMC12716092)
Substance use disorder (SUD) during pregnancy is associated with an increased risk of adverse maternal and neonatal outcomes, yet many patients face significant barriers to accessing treatment, including experiencing bias and stigma from healthcare providers. To inform improvements in care delivery, this study explored the experiences of healthcare providers who care for pregnant individuals with SUD.
Researchers conducted seven focus group discussions (FGD) and fifteen in-depth interviews (IDI) using semi-structured guides, with participants drawn from both rural and urban hospital settings across Utah. All discussions were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, and examined using the Template Analysis approach.
Among FGD participants (n = 37), the sample was predominantly white (94.6 %), female (86.5 %), rural (89.2 %), and comprised of nurses (78.4 %). The IDI sample (n = 15) was more gender diverse (60 % female), had greater representation of physicians (53.3 %), and a higher proportion of urban participants (60.0 %). Template analysis revealed four major themes. First, providers held a range of perceptions toward pregnant individuals with SUD, reflecting both stigma and empathy. Second, many emphasized the importance of building trust through nonjudgmental communication and emotional support. Third, providers reported high levels of burnout, particularly due to limited resources and systemic barriers. Finally, participants highlighted knowledge gaps related to SUD clinical care and confusion around regulatory requirements like mandatory reporting.
Despite the challenges described, many providers expressed strong dedication to delivering compassionate, person-centered care. The findings underscore the need for targeted provider education, institutional policies that reduce care barriers, and increased community and institutional resources to better support patients with SUD during pregnancy.
Wallis B et al., 2026 · Contraception · Free to read
To characterize how commercially available fertility-tracking devices and wearables define ovulation and anovulation, evaluate available comparator evidence, and assess user burden across 19 selected technologies. We conducted a structured landscape analysis of 19 fertility-tracking devices and wearables available in the United States. Technologies were evaluated for biomarker type, operational definitions of ovulation and anovulation, comparator evidence, intended use, regulatory status, and user burden, among other variables. Technologies clustered into four major categories: luteinizing hormone (LH)-only devices, multi-hormone devices, basal body temperature (BBT)-based wearables, and BBT-based thermometers. LH-only devices generally defined ovulation by detecting an LH surge or peak; multi-hormone devices incorporated LH and/or pregnanediol-3-glucuronide (PdG) measurements; and BBT-based technologies relied on thermal shifts. Explicit definitions of anovulation were uncommon and were frequently inferred from the absence of ovulation-associated biomarkers. The existence and design of comparator evidence varied substantially across technologies. Most comparator studies relied on surrogate measures such as urinary or serum hormones, whereas few technologies had comparator evidence against physiological reference standards such as transvaginal ultrasound (TVUS). Comparator studies in irregular-cycle populations were uncommon despite frequent marketing of these devices as appropriate for users with irregular cycles. User burden varied substantially across technologies. Fertility-tracking technologies demonstrate substantial heterogeneity in operational definitions, comparator evidence, and user burden. Greater transparency regarding ovulation and anovulation definitions, clearer reporting of comparator evidence, and more representative evaluation in irregular-cycle populations are needed to support accurate interpretation and integration into reproductive healthcare.
McAllaster S et al., 2026 · Contraception
To identify factors associated with unacceptable Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) responses, Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores, and satisfaction at time of intrauterine device (IUD) placement. Recruitment occurred at six Utah clinics between 6/24-2/25. Participants completed procedure surveys on demographics, reproductive history, anticipated pain, anxiety, and coping skills. Post-placement surveys assessed PASS responses, experienced pain by VAS (1-100mm) and satisfaction with IUD placement (5-point Likert scale). We determined factors associated with unacceptable PASS responses and a cut point delineating "low" vs "high" pain to assess measure associations. Of 194 participants, 21% (n = 41) reported an unacceptable PASS, which was associated with higher mean anticipated (65 mm vs 51 mm; padj=0.01) and experienced (76 mm vs 46 mm; padj<0.001) pain, prior sexual assault (55% vs 28%; padj=0.016), or violent death of someone close (25% vs 7%; padj=0.024). In controlled analysis, higher experienced pain predicted unacceptable PASS (OR:1.10;95%CI:1.06, 1.14). "High" pain (≥61mm) occurred in 44% of all participants. Of those with high pain, 55% reported an acceptable PASS response. History of prior pelvic exam (p = 0.02, padj 0.20), prior IUD placement (p = 0.003; padj 0.12), or violent death of someone close (p = 0.011; padj 0.13) influenced unacceptable PASS responses in this group. Of all participants, 21% reported dissatisfaction (n = 16) or neutral response (n = 24) regarding their IUD placement, among which only 13 reported an unacceptable PASS (32%). Satisfaction was influenced by mean VAS score (61 mm dissatisfied/neutral vs 50 mm satisfied; p = 0.01; padj 0.90). IUD placement pain level may influence satisfaction, but less than half of those with high pain (≥61mm) reported an unacceptable experience. IUD placement pain experiences are multi-dimensional and cannot be described by pain level alone. High levels of placement pain influence satisfaction and overlap but are not collinear with acceptability responses. Acceptability of IUD may be subject to temporal bias and influenced by whether their goals/needs are met and whether the pain was ultimately worth it.
Stanford JB et al., 2024 · Linacre Q · Free full text on PubMed Central
Fertility awareness-based methods (FABMs), also known as natural family planning (NFP), enable couples to identify the days of the menstrual cycle when intercourse may result in pregnancy ("fertile days"), and to avoid intercourse on fertile days if they wish to avoid pregnancy. Thus, these methods are fully dependent on user behavior for effectiveness to avoid pregnancy. For couples and clinicians considering the use of an FABM, one important metric to consider is the highest expected effectiveness (lowest possible pregnancy rate) during the correct use of the method to avoid pregnancy. To assess this, most studies of FABMs have reported a method-related pregnancy rate (a cumulative proportion), which is calculated based on all cycles (or months) in the study. In contrast, the correct use to avoid pregnancy rate (also a cumulative proportion) has the denominator of cycles with the correct use of the FABM to avoid pregnancy. The relationship between these measures has not been evaluated quantitatively. We conducted a series of simulations demonstrating that the method-related pregnancy rate is artificially decreased in direct proportion to the proportion of cycles with intermediate use (any use other than correct use to avoid or targeted use to conceive), which also increases the total pregnancy rate. Thus, as the total pregnancy rate rises (related to intermediate use), the method-related pregnancy rate falls artificially while the correct use pregnancy rate remains constant. For practical application, we propose the core elements needed to assess correct use cycles in FABM studies. Fertility awareness-based methods (FABMs) can be used by couples to avoid pregnancy, by avoiding intercourse on fertile days. Users want to know what the highest effectiveness (lowest pregnancy rate) would be if they use an FABM correctly and consistently to avoid pregnancy. In this simulation study, we compare two different measures: (1) the method-related pregnancy rate; and (2) the correct use pregnancy rate. We show that the method-related pregnancy rate is biased too low if some users in the study are not using the method consistently to avoid pregnancy, while the correct use pregnancy rate obtains an accurate estimate. SHORT In FABM studies, the method-related pregnancy rate is biased too low, but the correct use pregnancy rate is unbiased.
Klein Meuleman SJM et al., 2023 · JAMA Netw Open · Free full text on PubMed Central
Approximately 60% of women develop a uterine niche after a cesarean delivery (CD). A niche is associated with various gynecological symptoms including abnormal uterine bleeding, pain, and infertility, but there is little consensus in the literature on the distinction between the sonographic finding of a niche and the constellation of associated symptoms. To achieve consensus on defining the clinical condition that constitutes a symptomatic uterine niche and agree upon diagnostic criteria and uniform nomenclature for this condition. Design, Setting, and A consensus based modified electronic Delphi (eDelphi) study, with a predefined Rate of Agreement (RoA) of 70% or higher. Experts were selected according to their expertise with niche-related consultations, publications, and participation in expert groups and received online questionnaires between November 2021 and May 2022. Definition, nomenclature, symptoms, conditions to exclude, and diagnostic criteria of an illness caused by a symptomatic uterine niche. In total, 31 of the 60 invited experts (51.7%) participated, of whom the majority worked in university-affiliated hospitals (28 of 31 [90.3%]), specialized in benign gynecology (20 of 31 [64.5%]), and worked in Europe (24 of 31 [77.4%]). Three rounds were required to achieve consensus on all items. All participants underlined the relevance of a new term for a condition caused by a symptomatic niche and its differentiation from a sonographic finding only. Experts agreed to name this condition cesarean scar disorder, defined as a uterine niche in combination with at least 1 primary or 2 secondary symptoms (RoA, 77.8%). Defined primary symptoms were postmenstrual spotting, pain during uterine bleeding, technical issues with catheter insertion during embryo transfer, and secondary unexplained infertility combined with intrauterine fluid. Secondary symptoms were dyspareunia, abnormal vaginal discharge, chronic pelvic pain, avoiding sexual intercourse, odor associated with abnormal blood loss, secondary unexplained infertility, secondary infertility despite assisted reproductive technology, negative self-image, and discomfort during participation in leisure activities. Consensus was also achieved on certain criteria that should be met and conditions that should be excluded before making the diagnosis. Conclusions and Relevance: In this modified Delphi study, a panel of 31 international niche experts reached consensus for the constellation of symptoms secondary to a uterine niche and named it cesarean scar disorder.
Vedam S et al., 2019 · Reproductive Health · Free full text on PubMed Central
Recently WHO researchers described seven dimensions of mistreatment in maternity care that have adverse impacts on quality and safety. Applying the WHO framework for quality care, service users partnered with NGOs, clinicians, and researchers, to design and conduct the Giving Voice to Mothers (GVtM)-US study. Our multi-stakeholder team distributed an online cross-sectional survey to capture lived experiences of maternity care in diverse populations. Patient-designed items included indicators of verbal and physical abuse, autonomy, discrimination, failure to meet professional standards of care, poor rapport with providers, and poor conditions in the health system. We quantified the prevalence of mistreatment by race, socio-demographics, mode of birth, place of birth, and context of care, and describe the intersectional relationships between these variables. Of eligible participants (n = 2700), 2138 completed all sections of the survey. One in six women (17.3%) reported experiencing one or more types of mistreatment such as: loss of autonomy; being shouted at, scolded, or threatened; and being ignored, refused, or receiving no response to requests for help. Context of care (e.g. mode of birth; transfer; difference of opinion) correlated with increased reports of mistreatment. Experiences of mistreatment differed significantly by place of birth: 5.1% of women who gave birth at home versus 28.1% of women who gave birth at the hospital. Factors associated with a lower likelihood of mistreatment included having a vaginal birth, a community birth, a midwife, and being white, multiparous, and older than 30 years. Rates of mistreatment for women of colour were consistently higher even when examining interactions between race and other maternal characteristics. For example, 27.2% of women of colour with low SES reported any mistreatment versus 18.7% of white women with low SES. Regardless of maternal race, having a partner who was Black also increased reported mistreatment. This is the first study to use indicators developed by service users to describe mistreatment in childbirth in the US. Our findings suggest that mistreatment is experienced more frequently by women of colour, when birth occurs in hospitals, and among those with social, economic or health challenges. Mistreatment is exacerbated by unexpected obstetric interventions, and by patient-provider disagreements.
Buskmiller C et al., 2019 · Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent) · Free full text on PubMed Central
Poor social support is associated with adverse obstetric outcomes. Maternity group homes (MGHs), residential programs for pregnant women, have been found to improve social support in small studies. The present study aimed to verify these previous studies, discover whether there is a group of women whom MGHs most benefit, identify what services offer that benefit, and identify how to predict who will most benefit from MGH admission. Forty-three US MGHs from 14 states were surveyed from August 2015 to February 2017. The primary outcome was self-reported social support before and during MGH admission. The secondary outcome was the perception that MGH admission would help current and future relationships. Among 95 respondents, 54% perceived better in-MGH support compared to pre-MGH support. Women with poor pre-MGH support reported improvement; the converse was true of high pre-MGH support (P < 0.001). A total of 77% to 82% of participants anticipated that MGH admission would help current and future relationships, including 91% to 92% of women with stable or increased in-MGH support (P = 0.07 current, P < 0.01 future). Participants with increased in-MGH support reported more services as helpful (P < 0.05). In summary, MGHs are associated with improved support and relationships for most residents. The support score may identify which women may benefit most from MGH admission.
Marchand G et al., 2022 · JAMA network open · Free full text on PubMed Central
While some studies have found an association between marijuana use and adverse neonatal outcomes, results have not been consistent across all trials. To assess available data on neonatal outcomes in marijuana-exposed pregnancies. PubMed, Medline, ClinicalTrials.gov, Cochrane, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched from each database's inception until August 16, 2021. All interventional and observational studies that included pregnant women who were exposed to marijuana compared with pregnant women who were not exposed to marijuana and that reported neonatal outcomes were included. Reporting followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guideline. Data were extracted by 2 authors for all outcomes, which were pooled using a random-effects model as mean difference or risk ratio (RR) and 95% CI. Data were analyzed from August through September 2021. All outcomes were formulated prior to data collection. Outcomes included incidence of birth weight less than 2500 g, small for gestational age (defined as less than the fifth percentile fetal weight for gestational age), rate of preterm delivery (defined as before 37 weeks' gestation), gestational age at time of delivery, birth weight, incidence of neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission, Apgar score at 1 minute, Apgar score at 5 minutes, incidence of an Apgar score less than 7 at 5 minutes, fetal head circumference, and fetal length. Among 16 studies including 59 138 patients, there were significant increases in 7 adverse neonatal outcomes among women who were exposed to marijuana during pregnancy vs those who were not exposed during pregnancy. These included increased risk of birth weight less than 2500 g (RR, 2.06 [95% CI, 1.25 to 3.42]; P = .005), small for gestational age (RR, 1.61 [95% CI, 1.44 to 1.79]; P < .001), preterm delivery (RR, 1.28 [95% CI, 1.16 to 1.42]; P < .001), and NICU admission (RR, 1.38 [95% CI, 1.18 to 1.62]; P < .001), along with decreased mean birth weight (mean difference, -112.30 [95% CI, -167.19 to -57.41] g; P < .001), Apgar score at 1 minute (mean difference, -0.26 [95% CI, -0.43 to -0.09]; P = .002), and infant head circumference (mean difference, -0.34 [95% CI, -0.63 to -0.06] cm; P = .02). This study found that women exposed to marijuana in pregnancy were at a significantly increased risk of some adverse neonatal outcomes. These findings suggest that increasing awareness about these risks may be associated with improved outcomes.
Young-Wolff KC et al., 2024 · JAMA internal medicine · Free full text on PubMed Central
Many studies have evaluated whether in utero cannabis exposure is associated with fetal and neonatal outcomes, yet little is known about whether prenatal cannabis use is associated with maternal health outcomes during pregnancy. To evaluate whether prenatal cannabis use is associated with maternal health outcomes during pregnancy. DESIGN, SETTING, This population-based retrospective cohort study included pregnancies in Northern California from January 2011 to December 2019 that lasted 20 weeks or longer and were screened for prenatal cannabis use. Prenatal cannabis use was defined as any self-reported use during early pregnancy or a positive toxicology test result based on universal screening at entrance to prenatal care (approximately 8-10 weeks' gestation). Self-reported frequency of use (daily, weekly, monthly or less, never, unknown), use defined only by self-report, and use defined only by toxicology test results were examined. Electronic health record data were used to define the following outcomes: gestational hypertension, preeclampsia, eclampsia, gestational diabetes, gestational weight gain greater and less than guidelines, placenta previa, placental abruption, placenta accreta, and severe maternal morbidity. Adjusted risk ratios (aRRs) were calculated using a modified Poisson regression. The sample (n = 316 722 pregnancies; 250 221 unique individuals) included 84 039 (26.5%) Asian/Pacific Islander, 20 053 (6.3%) Black, 83 145 (26.3%) Hispanic, and 118 333 (37.4%) White individuals; the mean (SD) age was 30.6 (5.4) years. Overall, 20 053 (6.3%) screened positive for prenatal cannabis use; 2.9% were positive by self-report, 5.3% by toxicology testing, and 1.8% by both. The frequency of cannabis use was 1930 (0.6%) daily, 2345 (0.7%) weekly, 4892 (1.5%) monthly or less, and 10 886 (3.4%) unknown. Prenatal cannabis use was associated with greater risk of gestational hypertension (aRR, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.13-1.21), preeclampsia (aRR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.01-1.15), weight gain less than (aRR, 1.05; 95% CI, 1.01-1.08) and greater than (aRR, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.08-1.10) guidelines, and placental abruption (aRR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.05-1.36). The pattern of results was similar when defining prenatal cannabis use only by self-report or only by toxicology testing, and associations between the frequency of prenatal cannabis use and outcomes varied with outcome. The results of this cohort study suggest that prenatal cannabis use was associated with several adverse maternal health outcomes during pregnancy. Continued research is needed to understand whether characteristics of prenatal cannabis use (eg, dose, mode, and timing) moderate these associations.
