Sullivan Haley K, Armstrong Joanne C, Fox Kathe, Cohen Jessica L, Sinaiko Anna D
Harvard Interfaculty Initiative in Health Policy, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Women's Health and Genomics, CVS Health, Woonsocket, Rhode Island.
JAMA Netw Open. 2025 Jan 2;8(1):e2454565. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.54565.
Improving access to high-quality maternity care and reducing maternal morbidity and mortality are major policy priorities in the US. Previous research has primarily focused on access to general obstetric care rather than access to high-risk pregnancy care provided by maternal-fetal medicine subspecialists (MFMs).
To measure access to MFM services and determine patient factors associated with MFM service use, including MFM telemedicine.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This cohort study identified pregnancies in commercial health insurance claims from the Health Care Cost Institute from 2016 to 2021. More than 2.1 million pregnancies were included, where age at delivery was 18 years or greater and people were continuously enrolled for the duration of their pregnancy. The association of patient and pregnancy covariates with MFM involvement in care was analyzed using logistic regression; and rates of telemedicine for pregnancies in urban and rural areas were reported over time. Data were analyzed from June 2022 to March 2024.
Primary study outcomes included whether a pregnancy ever had a service from an MFM, the type of MFM services provided, and whether MFM care occurred via telemedicine.
There were 2 169 026 pregnancies among 1 968 091 unique people (1 325 212 [61.2%] aged 25 to 34 years). Among 1 625 237 pregnancies at risk for conditions that might require MFM involvement, 838 493 (51.6%) had an MFM service. Rates of MFM involvement in care varied considerably by geography, with pregnancies in rural areas having lower use than urban areas. Use of telemedicine-enabled MFM care increased in 2020 and 2021 but remained low: in 2021, 2.7% of urban pregnancies (7535 of 276 599) and 1.7% of rural pregnancies (550 of 32 949) received telemedicine-enabled MFM care.
In this cohort study, access to MFM services varied across geography, even among pregnancies at risk for conditions that might require MFM involvement. These results suggested a need to improve access to MFM care for at-risk pregnancies and to further explore expanded access via telemedicine.
改善高质量产科护理的可及性以及降低孕产妇发病率和死亡率是美国的主要政策优先事项。以往的研究主要集中在普通产科护理的可及性上,而非母胎医学亚专科医生(MFM)提供的高危妊娠护理的可及性。
衡量MFM服务的可及性,并确定与使用MFM服务相关的患者因素,包括MFM远程医疗。
设计、背景和参与者:这项队列研究从医疗保健成本研究所2016年至2021年的商业医疗保险理赔中识别出妊娠情况。纳入了超过210万例妊娠,分娩年龄为18岁及以上,且在整个孕期持续参保。使用逻辑回归分析患者和妊娠协变量与MFM参与护理之间的关联;并报告城乡地区妊娠远程医疗的使用率随时间的变化情况。数据于2022年6月至2024年3月进行分析。
主要研究结局包括妊娠是否曾接受过MFM的服务、提供的MFM服务类型以及MFM护理是否通过远程医疗进行。
1968091名不同个体中有2169026例妊娠(1325212例[61.2%]年龄在25至34岁之间)。在1625237例可能需要MFM参与的有风险妊娠中,838493例(51.6%)接受了MFM服务。MFM参与护理的比例因地理位置差异很大,农村地区的妊娠使用率低于城市地区。2020年和2021年,使用远程医疗的MFM护理有所增加,但仍然较低:2021年,2.7%的城市妊娠(276599例中的7535例)和l.7%的农村妊娠(32949例中的550例)接受了远程医疗的MFM护理。
在这项队列研究中,MFM服务的可及性因地理位置而异,即使在可能需要MFM参与的有风险妊娠中也是如此。这些结果表明,有必要改善高危妊娠获得MFM护理的可及性,并进一步探索通过远程医疗扩大可及性。