Download PDF
Am J Perinatol
DOI: 10.1055/s-0044-1782686
Review Article

The Impact of Social Vulnerability on Substance Use Detection Practices in Pregnancy

Virginia A. Lijewski
1   Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Colorado, Aurora, Colorado
,
Heather Aldrich
1   Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Colorado, Aurora, Colorado
,
Heather L. Straub
1   Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Colorado, Aurora, Colorado
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

This study aimed to synthesize current literature regarding the impact of social vulnerability on pregnancy-related substance use detection in the United States and highlight disparities in substance use detection practices. Clinicaltrials.gov, Google Scholar, PubMed (includes MEDLINE), and Cochrane Library databases were searched using the following Medical Subject Headings (MeSH): ([“pregnancy” or “prenatal”] AND [“substance use screening” or “urine toxicology testing” or “toxicology testing” or “urine drug screening” or “CRAFFT” or “4P's” or “4P's Plus” or “NIDA Quick Screen” or “DAST-10” or “SURP-P” or “WIDUS”], AND (“bias” or “disparities” or “social vulnerability”]). The search included systematic reviews, prospective and retrospective studies, randomized controlled trials, case studies, and qualitative and quantitative research from January 2014 through November 2023. Selected literature was limited to studies published in English, which included a study population of either pregnant individuals or pregnancy health care providers in the United States, and that were focused on inequities in pregnancy substance use detection. Using Covidence, three authors screened abstracts, and two screened full articles for inclusion. The included studies were evaluated for quality of evidence using the mixed methods appraisal tool. The search yielded 4,188 manuscripts; 37 were eligible for full review. A total of 18 manuscripts were included based on the relevancy of the topic. The most common social vulnerability domain identified was minority status (17/18), followed by socioeconomic status (11/18), household characteristics (8/18), and housing type (1/18). Social vulnerability plays a role in substance use detection among pregnant individuals. Most notably, race and ethnicity, age, and public insurance lead to increased rates of detection, though most individual factors need to be studied in greater depth. This study was registered with PROSPERO (PROSPERO ID CRD42022352598), the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews.

Key Points

  • Socially vulnerable pregnant individuals are more likely to receive substance use screening or urine toxicology testing.

  • Race, ethnicity, age, and insurance influence substance use detection disparities.

  • More research is needed to understand how other characteristics influence disparities in substance use detection.

Keywords

substance use detection - urine toxicology testing - health disparities - social vulnerability - pregnancy


Publication History

Received: 05 January 2024

Accepted: 26 February 2024

Article published online:
19 March 2024

© 2024. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • References

  • 1 Marmot M, Friel S, Bell R, Houweling TA, Taylor S. Commission on Social Determinants of Health. Closing the gap in a generation: health equity through action on the social determinants of health. Lancet 2008; 372 (9650): 1661-1669
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Ades V, Goddard B, Pearson Ayala S, Chemouni Bach S, Wu SX. ACOG Committee Opinion No. 729: Importance of social determinants of health and cultural awareness in the delivery of reproductive health care. Obstet Gynecol 2018; 131 (06) 1162-1163
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Social Determinants of Health at CDC. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Accessed June 25, 2023 at: https://www.cdc.gov/about/sdoh/index.html
    PubMed
  • 4 Bergstrand K, Mayer B, Brumback B, Zhang Y. Assessing the relationship between social vulnerability and community resilience to hazards. Soc Indic Res 2015; 122 (02) 391-409
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Flanagan BE, Gregory EW, Hallisey EJ, Heitgerd JL, Lewis B. A social vulnerability index for disaster management. J Homel Secur Emerg Manag 2011; 8 (01) 00001 02202154773551792
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Bourgois P, Holmes SM, Sue K, Quesada J. Structural vulnerability: operationalizing the concept to address health disparities in clinical care. Acad Med 2017; 92 (03) 299-307
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Grabovschi C, Loignon C, Fortin M. Mapping the concept of vulnerability related to health care disparities: a scoping review. BMC Health Serv Res 2013; 13: 94
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. CDC SVI Documentation 2020. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Updated August 5, 2022. Accessed July 4, 2023 at: https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/placeandhealth/svi/documentation/SVI_documentation_2020.html
    PubMed
  • 9 Givens M, Teal EN, Patel V, Manuck TA. Preterm birth among pregnant women living in areas with high social vulnerability. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM 2021; 3 (05) 100414
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Yee CW, Cunningham SD, Ickovics JR. Application of the social vulnerability index for identifying teen pregnancy intervention need in the United States. Matern Child Health J 2019; 23 (11) 1516-1524
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Kiefer MK, Mehl R, Costantine MM. et al. Association between social vulnerability and influenza and tetanus-diphtheria-acellular pertussis vaccination in pregnant and postpartum individuals. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM 2022; 4 (03) 100603
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Perez MT, Bucholz E, Asimacopoulos E. et al. Impact of maternal social vulnerability and timing of prenatal care on outcome of prenatally detected congenital heart disease. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2022; 60 (03) 346-358
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Venkatesh KK, Germann K, Joseph J. et al. Association between social vulnerability and achieving glycemic control among pregnant individuals with pregestational diabetes. Obstet Gynecol 2022; 139 (06) 1051-1060
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Amaro H, Sanchez M, Bautista T, Cox R. Social vulnerabilities for substance use: Stressors, socially toxic environments, and discrimination and racism. Neuropharmacology 2021; 188: 108518
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Weber A, Miskle B, Lynch A, Arndt S, Acion L. Substance use in pregnancy: identifying stigma and improving care. Subst Abuse Rehabil 2021; 12: 105-121
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Perlman NC, Cantonwine DE, Smith NA. Toxicology testing in pregnancy: evaluating the role of social profiling. Obstet Gynecol 2020; 136 (03) 607-609
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Wright TE, Terplan M, Ondersma SJ. et al. The role of screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment in the perinatal period. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2016; 215 (05) 539-547
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Merritt EL, Burduli E, Purath J, Smart D. Health care professionals' perceptions of caring for patients with substance use disorders during pregnancy. MCN Am J Matern Child Nurs 2022; 47 (05) 288-293
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Oni HT, Buultjens M, Abdel-Latif ME, Islam MM. Barriers to screening pregnant women for alcohol or other drugs: a narrative synthesis. Women Birth 2019; 32 (06) 479-486
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Committee Opinion No. 633: Alcohol abuse and other substance use disorders: ethical issues in obstetric and gynecologic practice. Obstet Gynecol 2015; 125 (06) 1529-1537
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Committee Opinion No. 711 Summary: Opioid use and opioid use disorder in pregnancy. Obstet Gynecol 2017; 130 (02) 488-489
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 American Psychiatric Association. Position Statement on Assuring the Appropriate Care of Pregnant and Newly-Delivered Women with Substance Use Disorders. Accessed July 1, 2023 at: https://www.psychiatry.org/getattachment/d0fe00fd-8b78-47e2-9098-63dc6917e1d4/Position-Assuring-Appropriate-Care-of-Pregnant-and-Newly-Delivered-Women-with-SUDs.pdf
    PubMed
  • 23 American College of Nurse Midwives. Position Statement. Substance Use Disorders in Pregnancy. Accessed May 14, 2023 at: https://www.midwife.org/acnm/files/acnmlibrarydata/uploadfilename/000000000052/PS-Substance-Use-Disorders-in-Pregnancy-FINAL-20-Nov-18.pdf
    PubMed
  • 24 Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. Clinical Drug Testing in Primary Care. Accessed June 23, 2023 at: https://store.samhsa.gov/sites/default/files/d7/priv/sma12-4668.pdf
    PubMed
  • 25 Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. Clinical Guidance for Treating Pregnant and Parenting Women With Opioid Use Disorder and Their Infants. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Accessed July 1, 2023 at: https://store.samhsa.gov/product/Clinical-Guidance-for-Treating-Pregnant-and-Parenting-Women-With-Opioid-Use-Disorder-and-Their-Infants/SMA18-5054
    PubMed
  • 26 Chang G, Rosenthel E. Substance use during pregnancy: Screening and prenatal care. Updated May 2, 2023. Accessed July 1, 2023 at: https://www.uptodate.com/contents/substance-use-during-pregnancy-screening-and-prenatal-care
    PubMed
  • 27 Ecker J, Abuhamad A, Hill W. et al. Substance use disorders in pregnancy: clinical, ethical, and research imperatives of the opioid epidemic: a report of a joint workshop of the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and American Society of Addiction Medicine. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2019; 221 (01) B5-B28
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Krist AH, Davidson KW, Mangione CM. et al; US Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for unhealthy drug use: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. JAMA 2020; 323 (22) 2301-2309
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM. et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 2021; 372 (71) n71
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Hong QN, Pluye P, Fàbregues S. et al. Improving the content validity of the mixed methods appraisal tool: a modified e-Delphi study. J Clin Epidemiol 2019; 111: 49-59.e1
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Hong QN, Pluye P, Fabregues S. et al. Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) Version 2018 User Guide. McGill University. Accessed April 26, 2023 at: http://mixedmethodsappraisaltoolpublic.pbworks.com/w/file/fetch/127916259/MMAT_2018_criteria-manual_2018-08-01_ENG.pdf
    PubMed
  • 32 Patel E, Bandara S, Saloner B. et al. Heterogeneity in prenatal substance use screening despite universal screening recommendations: findings from the Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System, 2016-2018. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM 2021; 3 (05) 100419
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 McCabe K. Criminalization of care: drug testing pregnant patients. J Health Soc Behav 2022; 63 (02) 162-176
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Pflugeisen BM, Mou J, Drennan KJ, Straub HL. Demographic discrepancies in prenatal urine drug screening in Washington state surrounding recreational marijuana legalization and accessibility. Matern Child Health J 2020; 24 (12) 1505-1514
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Son SL, Guiahi M, Heyborne KD. Historical and clinical factors associated with positive urine toxicology screening on labor and delivery. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2018; 228: 261-266
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Toquinto SM, Berglas NF, McLemore MR, Delgado A, Roberts SCM. Pregnant women's acceptability of alcohol, tobacco, and drug use screening and willingness to disclose use in prenatal care. Womens Health Issues 2020; 30 (05) 345-352
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Winchester ML, Shahiri P, Boevers-Solverson E. et al. Racial and ethnic differences in urine drug screening on labor and delivery. Matern Child Health J 2022; 26 (01) 124-130
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Young-Wolff KC, Sarovar V, Tucker LY. et al. Validity of self-reported cannabis use among pregnant females in northern California. J Addict Med 2020; 14 (04) 287-292
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Byrn MA, Buys EA, Mujahid M, Madsen K. Disparities in the provision of perinatal care based on patient race in the United States. Birth 2023; 50 (03) 627-635
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Peterson JA, Koelper NC, Curley C, Sonalkar SR, James AT. Reduction of racial disparities in urine drug testing after implementation of a standardized testing policy for pregnant patients. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM 2023; 5 (05) 100913
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Sarathy L, Chou JH, Lerou PH. et al. Limited utility of toxicology testing at delivery for perinatal cannabis use. Hosp Pediatr 2023; 13 (04) 317-325
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Perlman NC, Cantonwine DE, Smith NA. Racial differences in indications for obstetrical toxicology testing and relationship of indications to test results. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM 2022; 4 (01) 100453
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Chin JM, Chen E, Wright T. et al. Urine drug screening on labor and delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM 2022; 4 (06) 100733
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Coleman-Cowger VH, Oga EA, Peters EN, Trocin KE, Koszowski B, Mark K. Accuracy of three screening tools for prenatal substance use. Obstet Gynecol 2019; 133 (05) 952-961
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Klawans MR, Northrup TF, Villarreal YR. et al. A comparison of common practices for identifying substance use during pregnancy in obstetric clinics. Birth 2019; 46 (04) 663-669
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Guille C, Maldonado L, Simpson AN. et al. A non-randomized trial of in-person versus text/telephone screening, brief intervention and referral to treatment for pregnant and postpartum women. Psychiatr Res Clin Pract 2021; 3 (04) 172-183
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Mark K, Pierce E, Joseph D, Crimmins S. Interaction with the justice system and other factors associated with pregnant women's self-report and continuation of use of marijuana. Drug Alcohol Depend 2020; 206: 107723
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 48 Ondersma SJ, Chang G, Blake-Lamb T. et al. Accuracy of five self-report screening instruments for substance use in pregnancy. Addiction 2019; 114 (09) 1683-1693
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Olaniyan A, Hawk M, Mendez DD, Albert SM, Jarlenski M, Chang JC. Racial inequities in drug tests ordered by clinicians for pregnant people who disclose prenatal substance use. Obstet Gynecol 2023; 142 (05) 1169-1178
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 50 Hagiwara N, Elston Lafata J, Mezuk B, Vrana SR, Fetters MD. Detecting implicit racial bias in provider communication behaviors to reduce disparities in healthcare: challenges, solutions, and future directions for provider communication training. Patient Educ Couns 2019; 102 (09) 1738-1743
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 51 Lefebvre L, Midmer D, Boyd JA. et al. Participant perception of an integrated program for substance abuse in pregnancy. J Obstet Gynecol Neonatal Nurs 2010; 39 (01) 46-52
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 52 Marshall VJ, McLaurin-Jones TL, Kalu N. et al. Screening, brief intervention, and referral to treatment: public health training for primary care. Am J Public Health 2012; 102 (08) e30-e36
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 53 Kunins HV, Bellin E, Chazotte C, Du E, Arnsten JH. The effect of race on provider decisions to test for illicit drug use in the peripartum setting. J Womens Health (Larchmt) 2007; 16 (02) 245-255
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 54 Price HR, Collier AC, Wright TE. Screening pregnant women and their neonates for illicit drug use: consideration of the integrated technical, medical, ethical, legal, and social issues. Front Pharmacol 2018; 9: 961
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 55 Neuspiel DR, Zingman TM, Templeton VH, DiStabile P, Drucker E. Custody of cocaine-exposed newborns: determinants of discharge decisions. Am J Public Health 1993; 83 (12) 1726-1729
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 56 Berkman E, Brown E, Scott M, Adiele A. Racism in child welfare: ethical considerations of harm. Bioethics 2022; 36 (03) 298-304
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 57 Hajizadeh S, Ramezani Tehrani F, Simbar M, Farzadfar F. Factors influencing the use of prenatal care: a systematic review. Journal of Midwifery and Reproductive Health 2016; 4 (01) 544-557
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 58 Huang K, Waken RJ, Luke AA, Carter EB, Lindley KJ, Joynt Maddox KE. Risk of delivery complications among pregnant people experiencing housing insecurity. Am J Obstet Gynecol MFM 2023; 5 (02) 100819
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 59 Dong K, Jameel B, Gagliardi AR. How is patient-centred care conceptualized in obstetrical health? comparison of themes from concept analyses in obstetrical health- and patient-centred care. Health Expect 2022; 25 (03) 823-839
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar