Sickle cell disease (SCD) is associated with high-risk pregnancy and low rates of hormonal contraception use. Intersectional vulnerabilities among individuals with SCD in the United States raise historically and socially contingent questions about tubal sterilization (TS), yet immediate postpartum TS rates among individuals with SCD remain unknown.
Methods:
Using the 2012–2019 National Inpatient Sample, we conducted a repeated cross-sectional study to estimate the rate of TS among delivery hospitalizations for people with SCD, without SCD (non-SCD), Black people with and without SCD, and people with cystic fibrosis (CF). Logistic regression models estimated the adjusted odds of TS between SCD and comparison groups. Interaction analyses examined whether severe maternal morbidity (SMM) modified the association between TS and SCD.
Results:
After adjusting for patient and hospital characteristics, SCD had higher odds of TS compared with non-SCD deliveries (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.38 [1.06, 1.79]). Among deliveries coded with Black race, SCD deliveries had higher odds of TS than non-SCD deliveries (aOR = 1.42 [1.06, 1.90]). There was no difference in the odds of TS between SCD and CF deliveries (aOR = 1.0 [0.51, 2.24]). SMM more than doubled the odds of TS in SCD deliveries (interaction: aOR = 2.34 [1.57, 3.47]; aOR = 2.14 [1.40, 3.24] in Black race deliveries).
Conclusion:
Even after accounting for patient and hospital characteristics, people with SCD have higher odds of immediate postpartum TS compared with comparison groups. Possibly, SMM severity, patient preference, or clinician recommendations inform this finding. SMM is three to seven times more common in SCD than non-SCD pregnancies and may be a modifiable risk factor for TS in SCD deliveries.
DanielsK, AlmaJC. Current Contraceptive Status Among Women Aged 15–49: United States, 2017–2019. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention National Center for Health Statistics; 2020.
2.
ChanLM, WesthoffCL. Tubal sterilization trends in the United States. Fertil Steril, 2010; 94(1):1–6; doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2010.03.029
3.
ShapiroTM, FisherW, DianaA. Family planning and female sterilization in the United States. Soc Sci Med, 1983; 17(23):1847–1855; doi: 10.1016/0277-9536(83)90161-2
PotterJE, StevensonAJ, WhiteK, et al.Hospital variation in postpartum tubal sterilization rates in California and Texas. Obstet Gynecol, 2013; 121(1):152–158; doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e318278f241
6.
VolschoTW. Sterilization racism and pan-ethnic disparities of the past decade: The continued encroachment on reproductive rights. Wicazo Sa Rev, 2010; 25(1):17–31.
7.
ZiteN, WuellnerS, GilliamM. Failure to obtain desired postpartum sterilization: Risk and predictors. Obstet Gynecol, 2005; 105(4):794–799; doi: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000157208.37923.17
8.
ZiteN, WuellnerS, GilliamM. Barriers to obtaining a desired postpartum tubal sterilization. Contraception, 2006; 73(4):404–407; doi: 10.1016/j.contraception.2005.10.014
9.
GilliamM, DavisSD, BerlinA, et al.A qualitative study of barriers to postpartum sterilization and women’s attitudes toward unfulfilled sterilization requests. Contraception, 2008; 77(1):44–49; doi: 10.1016/j.contraception.2007.09.011
BorreroS, SchwarzEB, ReevesMF, et al.Race, insurance status, and tubal sterilization. Obstet Gynecol, 2007; 109(1):94–100; doi: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000249604.78234.d3
12.
BertottiAM. Gendered divisions of fertility work: Socioeconomic predictors of female versus male sterilization. J of Marriage and Family, 2013; 75(1):13–25; doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2012.01031.x
MosherW, HughesRB, BloomT, et al.Contraceptive use by disability status: New national estimates from the National Survey of Family Growth. Contraception, 2018; 97(6):552–558; doi: 10.1016/j.contraception.2018.03.031
15.
LiH, MitraM, WuJP, et al.Female sterilization and cognitive disability in the United States, 2011–2015. Obstet Gynecol, 2018; 132(3):559–564; doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000002778
16.
RothR, AinsworthSL. If they hand you a paper, you sign it: A call to end the sterilization of women in Prison. Hastings Womens Law J, 2015; 26(1):7–50.
17.
BorreroS, AbebeK, DehlendorfC, et al.Racial variation in tubal sterilization rates: Role of patient-level factors. Fertil Steril, 2011; 95(1):17–22; doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2010.05.031
18.
HarrisLH, WolfeT. Stratified reproduction, family planning care and the double edge of history. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol, 2014; 26(6):539–544; doi: 10.1097/GCO.0000000000000121
19.
RobertsD. Killing the Black Body: Race, Reproduction, and the Meaning of Liberty. Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group; 2014.
20.
BorreroS, NikolajskiC, RodriguezKL, et al.“Everything I know I learned from my mother…Or not”: Perspectives of African-American and white women on decisions about tubal sterilization. J Gen Intern Med, 2009; 24(3):312–319; doi: 10.1007/s11606-008-0887-3
21.
HahnTA, McKenzieF, HoffmanSM, et al.A prospective study on the effects of medicaid regulation and other barriers to obtaining postpartum sterilization. J Midwifery Womens Health, 2019; 64(2):186–193; doi: 10.1111/jmwh.12909
22.
ShrefflerKM, McQuillanJ, GreilAL, et al.Surgical sterilization, regret, and race: Contemporary patterns. Soc Sci Res, 2015; 50:31–45; doi: 10.1016/j.ssresearch.2014.10.010
23.
BorreroSB, ReevesMF, SchwarzEB, et al.Race, insurance status, and desire for tubal sterilization reversal. Fertil Steril, 2008; 90(2):272–277; doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2007.06.041
24.
HenshawSK, SinghS. Sterilization regret among U.S. Couples. Fam Plann Perspect, 1986; 18(5):238–240; doi: 10.2307/2134990
25.
ReillyPR. Eugenics and involuntary sterilization: 1907–2015. Annu Rev Genomics Hum Genet, 2015; 16(1):351–368; doi: 10.1146/annurev-genom-090314-024930
26.
HarrisCA, MandelbaumRS, RauAR, et al.Contraception and sterilization selection at delivery among pregnant patients with malignancy. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand, 2024; 103(4):695–706; doi: 10.1111/aogs.14654
27.
FortAT, MorrisonJC. Motherhood with sickle cell and sickle-C disease is not worth the risk. South Med J, 1972; 65(5):531–533; doi: 10.1097/00007611-197205000-00005
28.
FortAT, MorrisonJC, DiggsLW, et al.Counseling the patient with sickle cell disease about reproduction: pregnancy outcome does not justify the maternal risk. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 1971; 111(3):324–327; doi: 10.1016/0002-9378(71)90772-1
29.
CarrithersB, KleinR, KanterJ. Addressing reproductive education among young adults with Sickle Cell Disease (SCD): Sickle cell Reproductive Outreach and Education (ROE) project. Blood, 2023; 142(Supplement 1):3903.
30.
PeckerLH, HussainS, LanzkronS, et al.Women with sickle cell disease report low knowledge and use of long acting reversible contraception. J Natl Med Assoc, 2021; 113(5):552–559; doi: 10.1016/j.jnma.2021.05.005
31.
RoeAH, LangB, McAllisterA, et al.Contraceptive use and preferences among females with sickle cell disease. Contraception, 2022; 105:42–45; doi: 10.1016/j.contraception.2021.08.009
BowmanJE. Prenatal screening for hemoglobinopathies. Am J Hum Genet, 1991; 48(3):433–438.
34.
EarlyML, EkeAC, GemmillA, et al.Severe maternal morbidity and mortality in sickle cell disease in the national inpatient sample, 2012–2018. JAMA Netw Open, 2023; 6(2):e2254552; doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.54552
35.
BoghossianNS, GreenbergLT, SaadeGR, et al.Association of sickle cell disease with racial disparities and severe maternal morbidities in black individuals. JAMA Pediatr, 2023; 177(8):808–817; doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2023.1580
36.
LesageN, Deneux TharauxC, SaucedoM, et al.Maternal mortality among women with sickle-cell disease in France, 1996-2009. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol, 2015; 194:183–188; doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2015.09.016
37.
AlbaneseA, FrenchM, GossettDR. Request and fulfillment of postpartum tubal ligation in patients after high-risk pregnancy. Contraception, 2017; 95(3):234–238; doi: 10.1016/j.contraception.2016.08.009
38.
Wilson-FrederickS, HulihanM, MangumA, et al.Medicaid and CHIP Sickle Cell Disease Report, T-MSIS Analytic Files (TAF) 2017. Center for Medicaid and CHIP Services, Division of Quality and Health Outcomes, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services: Baltimore, MD; 2021.
39.
BrousseauDC, A PanepintoJ, NimmerM, et al.The number of people with sickle-cell disease in the United States: National and state estimates. Am J Hematol, 2010; 85(1):77–78; doi: 10.1002/ajh.21570
40.
Smith-WhitleyK. Complications in pregnant women with sickle cell disease. Hematology Am Soc Hematol Educ Program, 2019; 2019(1):359–366; doi: 10.1182/hematology.2019000039
41.
RanceJC, SkirtonH. An integrative review of factors that influence reproductive decisions in women with sickle cell disease. J Community Genet, 2019; 10(2):161–169; doi: 10.1007/s12687-018-0386-0
42.
DehlendorfC, AkersAY, BorreroS, et al.Evolving the preconception health framework: A call for reproductive and sexual health equity. Obstet Gynecol, 2021; 137(2):234–239; doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000004255
43.
SmithC, FatimaH, McClainE, et al.Supporting reproductive health among birthing persons with chronic conditions in the United States: A qualitative multilevel study using systems thinking to inform action. Health Serv Res, 2023; 58(2):521–533; doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.14131
44.
MercierRJ, PerrieraL, GodcharlesC, et al.Expedited scheduling of interval tubal ligation: A randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol, 2019; 134(6):1178–1185; doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000003550
45.
BaldwinMK, RodriguezMI, EdelmanAB. Lack of insurance and parity influence choice between long-acting reversible contraception and sterilization in women postpregnancy. Contraception, 2012; 86(1):42–47; doi: 10.1016/j.contraception.2011.11.005
46.
MacKayAP, KiekeBA, KooninLM, et al.Tubal sterilization in the United States, 1994–1996. Fam Plann Perspect, 2001; 33(4):161–165; doi: 10.2307/2673719
47.
SchmidtCN, FriedmanAM, DiMangoEA, et al.Trends in and outcomes of deliveries complicated by cystic fibrosis. Obstet Gynecol, 2022; 140(5):861–868; doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000004959
48.
CromwellEA, OstrengaJS, ToddJV, et al.Cystic fibrosis prevalence in the United States and participation in the cystic fibrosis foundation patient registry in 2020. J Cyst Fibros, 2023; 22(3):436–442; doi: 10.1016/j.jcf.2023.02.009
49.
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). National Inpatient Sample (NIS). 2012.
50.
KuklinaEV, WhitemanMK, HillisSD, et al.An enhanced method for identifying obstetric deliveries: Implications for estimating maternal morbidity. Matern Child Health J, 2008; 12(4):469–477; doi: 10.1007/s10995-007-0256-6
51.
ClappMA, JamesKE, FriedmanAM. Identification of delivery encounters using international classification of diseases, tenth revision, diagnosis and procedure codes. Obstet Gynecol, 2020; 136(4):765–767; doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000004099
52.
FarooqF, MogayzelPJ, LanzkronS, et al.Comparison of US federal and foundation funding of research for sickle cell disease and cystic fibrosis and factors associated with research productivity. JAMA Netw Open, 2020; 3(3):e201737; doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.1737
53.
LeeL, Smith-WhitleyK, BanksS, et al.Reducing health care disparities in sickle cell disease: A review. Public Health Rep, 2019; 134(6):599–607; doi: 10.1177/0033354919881438
54.
GrosseSD, GreenNS, ReevesSL. Administrative data identify sickle cell disease: A critical review of approaches in U.S. health services research. Pediatr Blood Cancer, 2020; 67(12):e28703; doi: 10.1002/pbc.28703
55.
OlaniranKO, SeethapathyH, ZhaoSH, et al.Validity of international classification of diseases codes for sickle cell trait and sickle cell disease. J Gen Intern Med, 2020; 35(4):1323–1324; doi: 10.1007/s11606-019-05555-w
56.
PatelEM, SwamyGK, HeineRP, et al.Medical and obstetric complications among pregnant women with cystic fibrosis. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 2015; 212(1):98.e1–e9; doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2014.07.018
57.
FangNZ, WesthoffCL. Update on incidence of inpatient tubal ligation and long-acting reversible contraception in the United States. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 2022; 227(3):477.e1–477.e7; doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2022.05.021
58.
SheynD, AroraKS. Changes in rates of inpatient postpartum long-acting reversible contraception and sterilization in the USA, 2012–2016. Matern Child Health J, 2021; 25(10):1562–1573; doi: 10.1007/s10995-021-03152-0
59.
MonizMH, ChangT, HeislerM, et al.Inpatient postpartum long-acting reversible contraception and sterilization in the United States, 2008–2013. Obstet Gynecol, 2017; 129(6):1078–1085; doi: 10.1097/AOG.0000000000001970
MainEK, AbreoA, McNultyJ, et al.Measuring severe maternal morbidity: Validation of potential measures. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 2016; 214(5):643.e1–e10; doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2015.11.004
62.
HimesKP, BodnarLM. Validation of criteria to identify severe maternal morbidity. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol, 2020; 34(4):408–415; doi: 10.1111/ppe.12610
63.
KilpatrickSK, EckerJL, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the Society for Maternal–Fetal Medicine. Severe maternal morbidity: Screening and review. Am J Obstet Gynecol, 2016; 215(3):B17–B22; doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2016.07.050
64.
FabricantSP, OparaKN, PaulJV, et al.The positive predictive value of hospital discharge data for identifying severe maternal morbidity with and without blood transfusion. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf, 2023; 49(9):467–473; doi: 10.1016/j.jcjq.2023.05.004
65.
ArcherKJ, LemeshowS. Goodness-of-fit test for a logistic regression model fitted using survey sample data. Stata J, 2006; 6(1):97–105; doi: 10.1177/1536867X0600600106
66.
RaoJNK, ScottAJ. On Chi-Squared tests for multiway contingency tables with cell proportions estimated from survey data. Ann Statist, 1984; 12(1):46–60; doi: 10.1214/aos/1176346391
67.
HouchensR, RossD, ElixhauserA. Final Report on Calculating National Inpatient Sample (NIS) Variances for Data Years 2012 and Later. In: HCUP Methods Series Report. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ); 2015.
68.
VandenbrouckeJP, von ElmE, AltmanDG, et al.; STROBE Initiative. Strengthening the reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med, 2007; 4(10):e297; doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0040297
69.
MalinowskiAK, ShehataN, D’SouzaR, et al.Prophylactic transfusion for pregnant women with sickle cell disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Blood, 2015; 126(21):2424–2435; quiz 2437; doi: 10.1182/blood-2015-06-649319
70.
AlanS, SharmaD, PeckerLH. Prophylactic red cell transfusions for sickle cell disease pregnancy: Increased use of therapy could transform outcomes. Curr Opin Hematol, 2024; 31(6):285–293; doi: 10.1097/MOH.0000000000000837
71.
StanekCJ, ReichJ, TherouxCI, et al.Reproductive health counseling among youth with sickle cell disease. J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol, 2023; 36(4):393–398; doi: 10.1016/j.jpag.2023.03.002
72.
PeckerLH, SharmaD, NeroA, et al.Knowledge gaps in reproductive and sexual health in girls and women with sickle cell disease. Br J Haematol, 2021; 194(6):970–979; doi: 10.1111/bjh.17658
73.
RoeAH, WuJ, McAllisterA, et al.Contraceptive attitudes and beliefs of women with sickle cell disease: A qualitative study. Womens Health Issues, 2024; 34(4):409–416; doi: 10.1016/j.whi.2024.03.007
74.
WailooK, PembertonS. The Troubled Dream of Genetic Medicine: Ethnicity and Innovation in Tay-Sachs, Cystic Fibrosis, and Sickle Cell Disease. JHU Press; 2006.
75.
ChouchanaL, CollierM, MartinC, et al.CFTR modulators and pregnancy outcomes: Early findings from a nationwide cohort study. J Cyst Fibros, 2025; 24(3):469–475; doi: 10.1016/j.jcf.2025.03.002
76.
JainR, PengG, LeeM, et al.Impact of cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator modulators on maternal outcomes during and after pregnancy. Chest, 2025; 167(2):348–361; doi: 10.1016/j.chest.2024.09.019
77.
WhiteK, PotterJE, ZiteN. Geographic variation in characteristics of postpartum women using female sterilization. Womens Health Issues, 2015; 25(6):628–633; doi: 10.1016/j.whi.2015.06.011
78.
RiceWS, ReddSK, LukeAA, et al.Dispersion of contraceptive access policies across the United States from 2006 to 2021. Prev Med Rep, 2022; 27:101827; doi: 10.1016/j.pmedr.2022.101827
79.
BriganceC, LucasR, JonesE, et al.Nowhere to Go: Maternity Care Deserts Across the U.S. March of Dimes; 2022.
80.
RodriguezMI, AcevedoAM, RenfroS, et al.Association of intrapartum severe maternal morbidity with receipt of postpartum contraception among Medicaid recipients. Contraception, 2023; 127:110110; doi: 10.1016/j.contraception.2023.110110
81.
GinsburgF, RappR. The politics of reproduction. Annu Rev Anthropol, 1991; 20:311–343; doi: 10.1146/annurev.an.20.100191.001523
82.
ScottRB, CastroO. Screening for sickle cell hemoglobinopathies. JAMA, 1979; 241(11):1145–1147.
ZhuDT, ZhaoL, AlzoubiT, et al.Public health and clinical implications of Dobbs v. Jackson for patients and healthcare providers: A scoping review. PLoS One, 2024; 19(3):e0288947; doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0288947
85.
XuX, ChenL, DesaiVB, et al.Tubal sterilization rates by state abortion laws after the Dobbs Decision. JAMA, 2024; 332(14):1204–1206; doi: 10.1001/jama.2024.16862
86.
GhomeshiA, DiazP, HenryV, et al.The interest in permanent contraception peaked following the leaked supreme court majority opinion of Roe vs. Wade: A cross-sectional google trends analysis. Cureus, 2022; 14(10):e30582; doi: 10.7759/cureus.30582
87.
StoneburnerA, LucasR, FontenotJ, et al.Nowhere to Go: Maternity Care Deserts Across the US. March of Dimes; 2024.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
