Journal of pediatric health care : official publication of National Association of Pediatric Nurse Associates & Practitioners · 2023
Mixed-methods Exploration of Telehealth-supported Long-acting Reversible Contraceptive Services in School-based Health Centers: How Much Added Value?
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Maier Malia C, Gold Melanie A, Vacca Susan H, Garbers Samantha
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: This study explored adolescent and young adult preferences and experiences with telehealth-supported long-acting reversible contraceptive (LARC) services in New York City school-based health centers (SBHCs) during COVID-19.
METHOD: Sequential mixed methods included post-LARC insertion surveys and in-depth interviews.
RESULTS: Survey respondents (n = 45) were aged 14-21 years and predominantly Hispanic (53.3%). Only four respondents completed a postinsertion visit via telehealth. Most (82.2%) preferred in-person for future LARC visits; none preferred telehealth. Four themes emerged in interviews (n = 15): LARC self-efficacy and autonomy; SBHC convenience and accessibility; comfort with SBHC providers; and preference for in-person visits despite telehealth benefits.
DISCUSSION: Although telehealth theoretically adds value to LARC service delivery, uptake and preference for telehealth in the SBHC context were low. Despite the perceived acceptability of telehealth, adolescents and young adults prefer in-person SBHC visits, suggesting SBHC access may eliminate barriers to care that telehealth seeks to overcome.
METHOD: Sequential mixed methods included post-LARC insertion surveys and in-depth interviews.
RESULTS: Survey respondents (n = 45) were aged 14-21 years and predominantly Hispanic (53.3%). Only four respondents completed a postinsertion visit via telehealth. Most (82.2%) preferred in-person for future LARC visits; none preferred telehealth. Four themes emerged in interviews (n = 15): LARC self-efficacy and autonomy; SBHC convenience and accessibility; comfort with SBHC providers; and preference for in-person visits despite telehealth benefits.
DISCUSSION: Although telehealth theoretically adds value to LARC service delivery, uptake and preference for telehealth in the SBHC context were low. Despite the perceived acceptability of telehealth, adolescents and young adults prefer in-person SBHC visits, suggesting SBHC access may eliminate barriers to care that telehealth seeks to overcome.