Support for and interest in alternative models of medication abortion provision among a national probability sample of U.S. women

Motivations for obtaining advance provision of medication abortion in the United States: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Advance provision of medication abortion, or the prescription of mifepristone and misoprostol before pregnancy occurs, is an unexplored care model aimed at expanding abortion access. We examine motivations for obtaining advance provision from the online telemedicine service, Aid Access, which supports people in the United States.

METHODS

Between May and November 2023, we conducted semi-structured, in-depth interviews with 39 people who obtained advance provision between January 2022 and April 2023. Interviews were transcribed and we conducted a thematic analysis to assess individual motivations.

RESULTS

Participants were motivated to obtain medications because of the Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization (Dobbs) draft opinion leak and eventual decision. Participants expressed concerns about access to abortion under current and future abortion restrictions. Concerns about restrictions prompted people to make a backup plan for themselves and loved ones, and participants compared advance provision to other emergency medications and practices. Some participants were motivated to have medications on hand because pregnancy would be either unsafe or difficult. Others were trying to become pregnant, but because of their health histories they were cognisant of the health risks of a desired pregnancy. Overall, participants were motivated to take back control of their reproductive autonomy in the face of inevitable abortion bans.

CONCLUSIONS

The need for autonomy, resistance and reassurance were woven throughout participant's motivations for obtaining advance provision. The Dobbs decision acted as a catalyst for action to take back reproductive autonomy and prepare for a lack of access to abortion care.

Young People's Support for and Personal Interest in an Advance Provision Model for Medication Abortion

PURPOSE

To assess young people's interest in advance provision (AP) of medication abortion-receiving mifepristone and misoprostol from a clinician in advance for their future use.

METHODS

From November 2022-August 2023 we administered an electronic survey regarding advance provision to patients assigned female at birth at four Bay Area youth-serving clinics.

RESULTS

Among 152 people ages 14-24 years (mean 17.9) surveyed, 73.7% (95% CI, 65.9%-80.5%) supported and 46.1% (95% CI, 37.9%-54.3%) were interested in the AP model. AP interest was higher among people who experienced three or more difficulties trying to access reproductive healthcare (70.6% [95% CI, 44.0%-89.7%]) and who experienced food or housing insecurity (60.3% [95% CI, 46.6%-73.0%]). Most youth (81.6%) had a safe place to store the pills for later use; this proportion was significantly higher among people ages 18-24 years (88.5%) than teens ages 14-17 years (74.3%, P = .025). The most common perceived advantages of AP included being able to have the abortion earlier in pregnancy (61.8%), privacy (57.9%) and convenience (50.7%). Common disadvantages noted included concern that people might take the pills incorrectly (50.0%) or lose the pills (40.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

Young people have considerable interest in AP of medication abortion. Further research is needed to document the AP model's feasibility, clinical outcomes, and effect on access for adolescents.

Medical abortion in Ghana: A non-randomized, non-inferiority study of access through pharmacies compared with clinics

OBJECTIVES

To compare self-reported clinical outcomes following medical abortion with mifepristone and misoprostol sourced from either a pharmacy or health clinic.

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted a prospective, non-randomized, non-inferiority cohort study across four regions in Ghana, from high-volume pharmacies and health clinics. Participants seeking medical abortion (less than nine weeks' gestation) who met usual medical abortion eligibility criteria were recruited. Data collection included baseline surveys, follow-up phone interviews, and self-reported assessments of medical abortion outcomes. The study aimed to enroll 2000 medical abortion users (1000 from each source).

RESULTS

Complete outcome data was available and analyzed from 1958 participants (of 2208 enrolled), with the adjusted risk difference of need for additional treatment to complete the abortion indicating non-inferiority of the pharmacy group compared to the clinic group [-2.3% (95% CI -5.3% to 0.7%)]. Both groups reported low rates of additional treatment (4.9%) and adhered similarly to the abortion regimen. Secondary outcomes showed no significant differences, with moderate acceptability in both groups (65.4% pharmacy, 52.3% facility). Adverse outcomes were rare: one ectopic pregnancy, one blood transfusion and no deaths or other major complications were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Accessing medical abortion pills directly from pharmacies without prior consultation from a provider demonstrated non-inferior self-reported clinical outcomes compared to seeking care from health clinics. The findings align with the growing global evidence supporting the safety and effectiveness of medical abortion self-care.

IMPLICATIONS

This study contributes data which support future registration of over-the-counter use of medical abortion drugs up to nine weeks' gestation. Such measures could expand options for safe abortion care, especially in regions where unsafe abortion poses a substantial maternal health risk.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03727308).

Over-the-Counter Medication Abortion as a Strategy to Expand Access to Care

This Viewpoint discusses the growing body of evidence that indicates that mifepristone and misoprostol meet the US Food and Drug Administration’s criteria for over-the-counter sale.

Primary care and abortion provider perspectives on mail-order medication abortion: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

This qualitative study aims to assess perspectives of clinicians and clinic staff on mail-order pharmacy dispensing for medication abortion.

METHODS

Participants included clinicians and staff involved in implementing a mail-order dispensing model for medication abortion at eleven clinics in seven states as part of a prospective cohort study, which began in January 2020 (before the FDA removed the in-person dispensing requirement for mifepristone). From June 2021 to July 2022, we invited participants at the participating clinics, including six primary care and five abortion clinics, to complete a semi-structured video interview about their experiences. We then conducted qualitative thematic analysis of interview data, summarizing themes related to perceived benefits and concerns about the mail-order model, perceived patient interest, and potential barriers to larger-scale implementation.

RESULTS

We conducted 24 interviews in total with clinicians (13 physicians and one nurse practitioner) and clinic staff (n = 10). Participants highlighted perceived benefits of the mail-order model, including its potential to expand abortion services into primary care, increase patient autonomy and privacy, and to normalize abortion services. They also highlighted key logistical, clinical, and feasibility concerns about the mail-order model, and specific challenges related to integrating abortion into primary care.

CONCLUSION

Clinicians and clinic staff working in primary care and abortion clinics were optimistic that mail-order dispensing of medication abortion can improve the ability of some providers to provide abortion and enable more patients to access services. The feasibility of mail-order pharmacy dispensing of medication abortion following the Supreme Court Dobbs decision is to be determined.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Registry: Clinicaltrials.gov.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03913104. Date of registration: first submitted on April 3, 2019 and first posted on April 12, 2019.

Interest in and Support for Alternative Models of Medication Abortion Provision Among Patients Seeking Abortion in the United States

INTRODUCTION

Medication abortion is safe and effective, but restrictions still limit patients from accessing this method. Alternative models of medication abortion provision, namely advance provision, over-the-counter (OTC), and online, could help improve access to care for some, although there is limited evidence about abortion patients' interest in these models.

METHODS

Between 2017 and 2019, we administered a cross-sectional survey to abortion patients at 45 clinics across 15 U.S. states to explore their interest in and support for advance provision, OTC, and online abortion access. We assessed relationships between sociodemographic characteristics and interest in and support for each model using bivariate logistic regressions and present perceived advantages and disadvantages of each model, as described by a subset of participants.

RESULTS

Among 1,965 people enrolled, 1,759 (90%) initiated the survey. Interest in and support for advance provision was highest (72% and 82%, respectively), followed by OTC (63% and 72%) and online access (57% and 70%). In bivariate analyses, non-Hispanic Black and Asian/Pacific Islander respondents expressed lower interest and support for the online model and Alaska Native/Native American respondents expressed higher interest in an OTC model, as compared with white respondents. Among 439 participants naming advantages and disadvantages of each model, the most common advantages included convenience and having the abortion earlier. The most common disadvantages were not seeing a provider first and possibly taking pills incorrectly.

CONCLUSIONS

Although most abortion patients expressed interest in and support for alternative models of medication abortion provision, variation in support across race/ethnicity highlights a need to ensure that abortion care service models meet the needs and preferences of all patients, particularly people from historically underserved populations.

Abortion Clients' Perceptions of Alternative Medication Abortion Service Delivery Options in Mississippi

OBJECTIVES

We assessed Mississippi abortion clients' perceptions of alternative medication abortion service delivery options that were restricted under state law but available elsewhere.

METHODS

We conducted in-depth interviews with medication abortion clients between November 2020 and March 2021 at Mississippi's only abortion facility. We described alternative service delivery models: telemedicine, medications by mail, and follow-up care in their community versus returning to the facility. We asked if participants would be interested in using any of these models, if available, and how use of each model would have changed their abortion experience. We used thematic analysis, organizing codes into common themes based on participants' preferences and concerns for each option.

RESULTS

Of the 25 participants interviewed, nearly all (n = 22) expressed interest in at least one option and reported that, had they been available, these would have alleviated cost, travel, and childcare barriers. Many believed these options would further ensure privacy, but a minority thought abortion was too sensitive for telemedicine or were concerned about mailing errors. Participants not interested in the alternative options also feared missing valued aspects of face-to-face care. Most did not return to the facility for follow-up (n = 19), citing financial and logistical barriers. Largely, participants were not interested in obtaining follow-up care in their community, citing concerns about provider judgment, stigma, and privacy.

CONCLUSIONS

Mississippi abortion clients were interested in models that would make abortion care more convenient while ensuring their privacy and allowing for meaningful client-provider interaction. These features of care should guide the development of strategies aimed at helping those in restricted settings, such as Mississippi, to overcome barriers to abortion care following the implementation of abortion bans in many states following the overturn of Roe v. Wade.

Advance Provision of Mifepristone and Misoprostol via Online Telemedicine in the US

This cross-sectional study examines trends in the demand and characteristics and motivations of individuals who requested advance provision of abortion medications.

Reach, experience, and acceptability of an abortion self-care intervention in Bolivia: a mixed-methods evaluation

In 2018, Ipas Bolivia launched an abortion self-care (ASC) community intervention with the goal of increasing access to supportive, well-informed abortion support provided by community agents (CAs). Between September 2019 and July 2020, Ipas conducted a mixed-methods evaluation to assess the reach, outcomes, and acceptability of the intervention. We used logbook data maintained by CAs to capture demographic characteristics and ASC outcomes of people supported. We also conducted in-depth interviews with 25 women who had received support and 22 CAs who had provided support. 530 people accessed ASC support through the intervention, most of whom were young, single, educated women accessing abortion in the first trimester. Among the 302 people who self-managed their abortions, 99% reported having a successful abortion. No women reported adverse events. All women interviewed expressed satisfaction with the support provided by the CA and, in particular, with the information, lack of judgement, and respect they felt from CAs. CAs spoke highly about their experience and viewed their participation as a way to increase people's ability to exercise their reproductive rights. Obstacles included experiences of stigma, fears of legal repercussions, and difficulties dispelling misconceptions around abortion. Legal restrictions and abortion stigma continue to complicate access to safe abortion, and findings from this evaluation highlight important avenues for the effectiveness and expansion of ASC interventions, including legal support to people who have abortions and those who provide abortion support, building capacity of people as informed buyers, and ensuring that interventions reach rural and other often under-served people.

Access to Reproductive Health Services Among People With Disabilities

Importance

People with disabilities face inequitable access to reproductive health (RH) services, yet the national prevalence of barriers to access experienced across disability types and statuses is unknown.

Objective

To assess the national prevalence of barriers to RH access experienced by people with disabilities.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cross-sectional study analyzed results of an online probability-based national survey of RH experiences that was conducted from December 2021 to January 2022. The national sample consisted of English- and Spanish-speaking panel members of a market research firm. Panelists were invited to participate in a survey on their RH experiences and opinions. These participants were aged 15 to 49 years and assigned female at birth (AFAB). Weighted proportions were estimated, and bivariable and multivariable regression analyses were performed to assess associations between disability status and barriers to accessing RH services.

Exposure

Using 5 of the 6 Washington Group Short Set on Functioning items, 8 dichotomous disability indicators were created: (1) vision, (2) hearing, (3) mobility, (4) activities of daily living, (5) communication, (6) overall disability status (a lot or more difficulty functioning in ≥1 domain), (7) some difficulty functioning (below the disability threshold; some or more difficulty functioning in ≥1 domain), and (8) multiple disabilities (a lot or more difficulty functioning in ≥2 domains).

Main Outcomes and Measures

Number and types of barriers (logistical, access, cost, privacy, and interpersonal relationship) to accessing RH services in the past 3 years.

Results

After exclusion, the final sample included 6956 people AFAB, with a mean (SD) age of 36.0 (8.3) years. Of these participants, 8.5% (95% CI, 7.6%-9.5%) met the disability threshold. Participants with disabilities compared with those without disabilities were disproportionately more likely to be non-Hispanic Black (18.8% [95% CI, 14.4%-24.1%] vs 13.2% [95% CI, 11.9%-14.5%]) or Hispanic or Latinx (completed survey in English: 18.1% [95% CI, 14.0%-23.0%] vs 14.6% [95% CI, 13.3%-16.0%]; completed survey in Spanish: 8.9% [95% CI, 6.2%-12.8%] vs 6.2% [95% CI, 5.4%-7.1%]) individuals, to identify as LGBTQAI (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer [or questioning], asexual [or allied], intersex; 16.4% [95% CI, 12.3%-21.6%] vs 11.8% [95% CI, 10.6%-13.1%]), to live below the federal poverty level (27.3% [95% CI, 22.3%-32.8%] vs 10.7% [95% CI, 9.7%-11.9%]), and to ever experienced medical mistreatment (49.6% [95% CI, 43.7%-55.5%] vs 36.5% [95% CI, 34.8%-38.2%]). Among those who had ever tried to access RH services (n = 6027), people with disabilities vs without disabilities were more likely to experience barriers (69.0% [95% CI, 62.9%-74.5%] vs 43.0% [95% CI, 41.2%-44.9%]), which were most often logistical (50.7%; 95% CI, 44.2%-57.2%) and access (49.9%; 95% CI, 43.4%-56.4%) barriers. The disability domains with the highest proportion of people who experienced 3 or more barriers in the past 3 years included activities of daily living (75.3%; 95% CI, 61.1%-85.6%), communication (65.1%; 95% CI, 49.5%-78.1%), and multiple (59.9%; 95% CI, 45.6%-72.7%) disabilities.

Conclusions and Relevance

This cross-sectional study found large disparities in access to RH services among people AFAB with disabilities. Findings indicated a need to alleviate barriers to RH care, including improving the transportation infrastructure and reinforcing patient-centered approaches that engender inclusivity in health care settings.

A prospective, comparative study of clinical outcomes following clinic-based versus self-use of medical abortion

BACKGROUND

To determine whether clinical outcomes differ among women accessing a combined medical abortion regimen from a health clinic when compared with those accessing it from a pharmacy.

METHODS

We conducted a multicentre, prospective, comparative, non-inferiority study of participants aged ≥15 years seeking medical abortion from five clinics and five adjacent pharmacy clusters in three provinces of Cambodia. Participants were recruited in-person at the point of purchase (clinic or pharmacy). Follow-up for self-reported pill use, acceptability, and clinical outcomes occurred by telephone at days 10 and 30 after mifepristone administration.

RESULTS

Over 10 months, we enrolled 2083 women with 1847 providing outcome data: 937 from clinics and 910 from pharmacies. Most were early in their pregnancy (mean gestational age of 6.3 and 6.1 weeks, respectively) and almost all took the pills correctly (98% and 96%,). Additional treatment needed to complete the abortion was non-inferior for the pharmacy group (9.3%) compared with the clinic group (12.7%). More from the clinic group received additional care from a provider, such as antibiotics or diagnostics tests, than those from the pharmacy group (11.5% and 3.2%,), and one ectopic pregnancy (pharmacy group) was successfully treated. Most said they felt prepared for what happened after taking the pills (90.9% and 81.3%, respectively, p=0.273).

CONCLUSIONS

Self-use of a combined medical abortion product resulted in comparable clinical outcomes as use following a clinical visit, consistent with existing literature on its safety and efficacy. Registration and availability of medical abortion as an over-the-counter product would likely increase women's access to safe abortion.

Perspectives on Alternative Models of Medication Abortion Provision Among Abortion Patients in the United States

OBJECTIVE

Restrictions on the availability of medication abortion are a barrier to accessing early abortion. People seeking medication abortion may be interested in obtaining the medications through alternative models. The purpose of this study was to explore patient perspectives on obtaining abortion medications in advance of pregnancy or over the counter (OTC).

STUDY DESIGN

Between October 2017 and August 2018, we conducted 30 in-depth interviews with abortion patients who indicated support for alternative models. We recruited patients from 10 abortion clinics in states with a range of policy environments. We analyzed interviews using inductive and deductive iterative techniques.

RESULTS

Participants identified logistical benefits of these alternative models, including eliminating travel to a clinic and multiple appointments, and increased privacy around decision-making. Participants were interested in advance provision for its convenience and the sense of preparedness that would come with having the pills available at home, yet some had concerns about the pills being found or stolen. Privacy was the key factor considered for OTC access, including both the privacy benefits of avoiding a clinic and the concern of having one's privacy compromised within the community if purchasing the medications in public.

CONCLUSIONS

People who have previously had a medication abortion are interested in alternative methods of provision for reasons concerning convenience, privacy, and avoiding burdens related to hostile policy environments, such as long travel distances to clinics and multiple appointments. Concerns around these models were primarily safety concerns for young people. Further research is needed to evaluate the safety, effectiveness, acceptability, and feasibility of these alternative models of providing medication abortion.

Self-Sourced Medication Abortion, Physician Authority, and the Contradictions of Abortion Care

The growing acknowledgment of the phenomenon of individuals terminating their pregnancies by obtaining the medications necessary for an abortion-which this article refers to as "self-sourced medication abortion" (SSMA)-has shed light on the current contradictions in the world of abortion provision. This article offers a brief historical overview of the relationship between abortion provision and mainstream medicine, pointing to the factors that have led to the marginalization of abortion care. It then discusses interviews with 40 physicians who provide abortions about their perspectives on SSMA, and it explores how this group responds to the contradictions presented by SSMA. In doing so, it interrogates the changing meaning of "physician authority" among this subset of physicians. The authors suggest that these interviewees represent an emergent sensibility among this generation of abortion physicians, a sensibility strongly tied to a commitment to social justice.

Advance provision of medication for induced abortion: A qualitative study of patient perspectives

OBJECTIVES

To examine potential users' perspectives regarding the provision of abortion medications for future use or "advance provision."

STUDY DESIGN

In this qualitative study, we partnered with an independent reproductive health care clinic in Washington State to conduct semistructured, in-depth interviews with 22 individuals who obtained a medication abortion between August 2021 and January 2022. We asked participants their views on advance provision of abortion medications. Interviews were transcribed and deidentified. Inductive content analysis was used to identify major themes.

RESULTS

Participants in our sample generally reacted positively to the idea of abortion medications for future use. Having pills in advance could improve timeliness and convenience of care and decrease the stigma associated with their use. Participants stressed the importance of adequate information regarding medication use, what to expect, and potential side effects. Most concerns about advance provision related to the safety and efficacy of medication abortion.

CONCLUSIONS

This study found that individuals who recently obtained a medication abortion supported the provision of abortion medications for future use.

IMPLICATIONS

Patient-centered educational materials, with adequate information for self-managing pregnancy termination, can be shared at time of prescription. Clinicians have an opportunity to offer these safe and effective medications in advance of need and increase timely access to this essential health care service. User concerns regarding abortion medications for future use should inform clinical innovation and evaluative research of service options.

Interest in advance provision of abortion pills: a national survey of potential users in the USA

OBJECTIVE

To assess interest in clinician-administered advance provision of abortion pills among potential users in the USA.

METHODS

Using social media advertisements, we recruited people living in the USA who were aged 18-45 years and assigned female at birth, who were not pregnant or planning pregnancy, for an online survey on reproductive health experiences and attitudes. We explored interest in advance provision of abortion pills, participant characteristics, including demographics and pregnancy history, contraceptive use, abortion knowledge and comfort, and healthcare system distrust. We used descriptive statistics to assess interest in advance provision, and ordinal regression modelling to evaluate differences in interest controlling for age, pregnancy history, contraceptive use, familiarity and comfort with medication abortion, and healthcare system distrust, reporting adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs).

RESULTS

From January-February 2022, we recruited 634 diverse respondents from 48 states, among whom 65% were interested, 12% neutral, and 23% disinterested in advance provision. There were no differences among interest groups by US region, race/ethnicity, or income. In the model, variables associated with interest included being aged 18-24 years (aOR 1.9, 95% CI 1.0 to 3.4) versus 35-45 years, using a tier 1 (permanent or long-acting reversible) or tier 2 (short-acting hormonal) contraceptive method (aOR 2.3, 95% CI 1.2 to 4.1, and aOR 2.2, 95% CI 1.2 to 3.9, respectively) versus no contraception, being familiar or comfortable with the medication abortion process (aOR 4.2, 95% CI 2.8 to 6.2, and aOR 17.1, 95% CI 10.0 to 29.0, respectively), and having high healthcare system distrust (aOR 2.2, 95% CI 1.0 to 4.4) versus low distrust.

CONCLUSION

As abortion access becomes more constrained, strategies are needed to ensure timely access. Advance provision is of interest to the majority of those surveyed and warrants further policy and logistical exploration.

Understanding Women's Communication with Their Providers During Medication Abortion and Abortion Pill Reversal: An Exploratory Analysis

Introduction/Objective: Medication abortion is a common experience for women in the United States, now totaling over 50% of all abortions. The purpose of this exploratory analysis is to understand women's medication abortion and abortion pill reversal decision-making experiences, with a particular focus on their communication with their medical providers. Methods: We surveyed women who contacted Heartbeat International to inquire about abortion pill reversal. Eligible women had to complete a minimum of the 2-week progesterone protocol in order to answer the questions on the electronic survey about their medication abortion and abortion pill reversal decisions. We assessed decision difficulty using a Likert scale and provider communication using the Questionnaire on the Quality of Physician-Patient (QQPPI) and analyzed women's narratives about their experiences using thematic analysis. Results: Thirty-three respondents met the eligibility criteria and filled out the QQPPI and decision-difficulty scales. Using the QQPPI scale, women scored their communication with their APR providers as significantly better than their communication with their abortion providers (p < 0.0001). Women reported that choosing medication abortion was significantly more difficult than choosing abortion pill reversal (p < 0.0001). White women, women with college degrees, and women who were not in a relationship with the father of the child reported more difficulty in choosing APR. Conclusion: As the number of women who contact the national hotline to inquire about abortion pill reversal increases, the need to understand the experiences of this growing population of women becomes more salient. This need is particularly important for health care providers who prescribe medication abortion and abortion pill reversal. The quality of the physician-patient interaction is essential to providing effective medical care to pregnant women.

Factors Associated With Knowledge and Experience of Self-managed Abortion Among Patients Seeking Care at 49 US Abortion Clinics

Importance

Patients attending US abortion clinics may consider or try self-managing their abortion before coming to the clinic, yet little is known about the factors associated with self-management behavior.

Objective

To examine the prevalence and factors associated with considering or attempting a self-managed abortion before attending a clinic.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This survey study included patients obtaining an abortion at 49 independent, Planned Parenthood, and academic-affiliated clinics chosen to maximize diversity in geographic, state policy, and demographic context in 29 states between December 2018 and May 2020. Data were analyzed from December 2020 to July 2021.

Exposures

Obtaining an abortion at a clinic.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Knowledge of medications used to self-manage an abortion, having considered medication self-management before attending the clinic, having considered any method of self-management before attending the clinic, and having tried any method of self-management before attending the clinic.

Results

The study included 19 830 patients, of which 99.6.% (17 823 patients) identified as female; 60.9% (11 834 patients) were aged 20 to 29 years; 29.6% (5824 patients) identified as Black, 19.3% (3799 patients) as Hispanic, and 36.0% (7095 patients) as non-Hispanic White; 44.1% (8252 patients) received social services; and 78.3% (15 197 patients) were 10 weeks pregnant or less. Approximately 1 in 3 (34%) knew about self-managed medication abortion, and among this subsample of 6750 patients, 1 in 6 (1079 patients [16.1%]) had considered using medications to self-manage before attending the clinic. Among the full sample, 1 in 8 (11.7%) considered self-managing using any method before clinic attendance, and among this subsample of 2328 patients, almost 1 in 3 (670 patients [28.8%]) attempted to do so. Preference for at-home abortion care was associated with considering medication self-management (odds ratio [OR], 3.52; 95% CI, 2.94-4.21), considering any method of self-management (OR, 2.80; 95% CI, 2.50-3.13), and attempting any method of self-management (OR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.10-1.69). Experiencing clinic access barriers was also associated with considering medication self-management (OR, 1.98; 95% CI, 1.69-2.32) and considering any method of self-management (OR, 2.09; 95% CI, 1.89-2.32).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this survey study, considering self-managed abortion was common before accessing in-clinic care, particularly among those on the margins of access or with a preference for at-home care. These findings suggest a need for expanded access to telemedicine and other decentralized abortion care models.

Telemedicine to improve reproductive health care for rural Coloradans: Perceptions of interest and access

PURPOSE

To evaluate rural Colorado women's access to and preferences for receiving reproductive health care services.

METHODS

We conducted an online survey of women ages 18-45 years old. We mailed recruitment postcards to a random sample of female, registered voters in rural Colorado zip codes. Survey questions assessed experiences, beliefs, and preferences regarding reproductive health care. We performed bivariate statistics and logistic regression for predictors of interest in telemedicine.

FINDINGS

Respondents (n = 478) had a median age of 34 years (range 18-45). Most women identified as White (90.2%) and were insured (67.1% private; 20.5% public). Most (74.1%) noted barriers to obtaining reproductive care in their communities. Those who reported barriers cited a median of 3 barriers (range 1-8), most commonly too few community-based providers (81.4%) and long distance to care (69.5%). Among respondents, 51.0% had used telemedicine before and 52.5% were interested in using telemedicine for reproductive health services. Interest in telemedicine significantly differed by perceived difficulty accessing care, previous telemedicine use, traveling over 100 miles for medical care in the last year, and belief in the safety of abortion. Those interested in telemedicine were less likely to value having an established relationship with providers and face-to-face visits.

CONCLUSIONS

Most reproductive-aged, rural Colorado women endorsed barriers to obtaining reproductive health care in their communities. Over half of rural women are interested in using telemedicine for reproductive health care; however, many are not. Both optimizing telemedicine and developing additional innovative solutions are needed to improve access to reproductive care in rural communities.

Improving experience of medical abortion at home in a changing therapeutic, technological and regulatory landscape: a realist review

OBJECTIVE

To inform UK service development to support medical abortion at home, appropriate for person and context.

DESIGN

Realist review SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Peer-reviewed literature from 1 January 2000 to 9 December 2021, describing interventions or models of home abortion care. Participants included people seeking or having had an abortion.

INTERVENTIONS

Interventions and new models of abortion care relevant to the UK.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Causal explanations, in the form of context-mechanism-outcome configurations, to test and develop our realist programme theory.

RESULTS

We identified 12 401 abstracts, selecting 944 for full text assessment. Our final review included 50 papers. Medical abortion at home is safe, effective and acceptable to most, but clinical pathways and user experience are variable and a minority would not choose this method again. Having a choice of abortion location remains essential, as some people are unable to have a medical abortion at home. Choice of place of abortion (home or clinical setting) was influenced by service factors (appointment number, timing and wait-times), personal responsibilities (caring/work commitments), geography (travel time/distance), relationships (need for secrecy) and desire for awareness/involvement in the process. We found experiences could be improved by offering: an option for self-referral through a telemedicine consultation, realistic information on a range of experiences, opportunities to personalise the process, improved pain relief, and choice of when and how to discuss contraception.

CONCLUSIONS

Acknowledging the work done by patients when moving medical abortion care from clinic to home is important. Patients may benefit from support to: prepare a space, manage privacy and work/caring obligations, decide when/how to take medications, understand what is normal, assess experience and decide when and how to ask for help. The transition of this complex intervention when delivered outside healthcare environments could be supported by strategies that reduce surprise or anxiety, enabling preparation and a sense of control.

#AbortionChangesYou: A Case Study to Understand the Communicative Tensions in Women's Medication Abortion Narratives

One out of four women in the United States will have an abortion by age 45. While abortion rates are steadily declining in the United States, the rate of medication abortions continues to increase, with 39% of all abortions being medication abortions. Our study is one of the first to analyze women's narratives after having had a medication abortion. Using relational dialectics theory, we conducted a case study of the nonpartisan website, Abortion Changes You. Our contrapuntal analysis rendered four sites of dialectical tension found across women's blog posts: only choice vs. other alternatives, unprepared vs. knowledgeable, relief vs. regret, and silence vs. openness. Each site of struggle characterized a different noteworthy moment within a woman's medication abortion experience: the decision, the medication abortion process, identity after abortion, and managing the stigmatizing silence before and after the abortion. We discuss theoretical and practical implications about how the larger politicized discourses prevalent within the abortion debate impact the liminality of women who are contemplating a medication abortion and affect their own narrative construction about the medication abortion experience.

Medical abortion offered in pharmacy versus clinic-based settings

BACKGROUND

Medical abortion is usually offered in a clinic or hospital, but could potentially be offered in other settings such as pharmacies. In many countries, pharmacies are a common first point of access for women seeking reproductive health information and services. Offering medical abortion through pharmacies is a potential strategy to improve access to abortion.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effectiveness and safety of medical abortion offered in pharmacy settings with clinic-based medical abortion.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, four other databases, two trials registries and grey literature websites in November 2020. We also handsearched key references and contacted authors to locate unpublished studies or studies not identified in the database searches.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We identified studies that compared women receiving the same regimen of medical abortion or post-abortion care in either a clinic or pharmacy setting. Studies published in any language employing the following designs were included: randomized trials and non-randomized studies including a comparative group.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently reviewed both retrieved abstracts and full-text publications. A third author was consulted in case of disagreement. We intended to use the Cochrane risk of bias tool, RoB 2, for randomized studies and used the ROBINS-I tool (Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Interventions) to assess risk of bias in non-randomized studies. GRADE methodology was used to assess the certainty of the evidence. The primary outcomes were completion of abortion without additional intervention, need for blood transfusion, and presence of uterine or systemic infection within 30 days of medical abortion.

MAIN RESULTS

Our search yielded 2030 records. We assessed a total of 89 full-text articles for eligibility. One prospective cohort study met our inclusion criteria. The included study collected data on outcomes from 605 women who obtained a medical abortion in Nepal from either a clinic or pharmacy setting. Both sites of care were staffed by the same auxiliary nurse midwives. Over all domains, the risk of bias was judged to be low for our primary outcome. During the pre-intervention period, the study's investigators identified a priori appropriate confounders, which were clearly measured and adjusted for in the final analysis. For women who received medical abortion in a pharmacy setting, compared to a clinic setting, there may be little or no difference in complete abortion rates (adjusted risk difference (RD)) 1.5, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.8 to 3.8; 1 study, 600 participants; low certainty evidence). The study reported no cases of blood transfusion, and a composite outcome, comprised mainly of infection complications, showed there may be little or no difference between settings (adjusted RD 0.8, 95% CI -1.0 to 2.8; 1 study, 600 participants; very low certainty evidence). The study reported no events for hospital admission for an abortion-related event or need for surgical intervention, and there may be no difference in women reporting being highly satisfied with the facility where they were seen (38% pharmacy versus 34% clinic, P = 0.87; 1 study, 600 participants; low certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Conclusions about the effectiveness and safety of pharmacy provision of medical abortion are limited by the lack of comparative studies. One study, judged to provide low certainty evidence, suggests that the effectiveness of medical abortion may not be different between the pharmacy and clinic settings. However, evidence for safety is insufficient to draw any conclusions, and more research on factors contributing to potential differences in quality of care is needed. It is important to note that this study included a care model where a clinician provided services in a pharmacy, not direct provision of care by pharmacists or pharmacy staff. Three ongoing studies are potentially eligible for inclusion in review updates. More research is needed because pharmacy provision could expand timely access to medical abortion, especially in settings where clinic services may be more difficult to obtain. Evidence is particularly limited on the patient experience and how the care process and quality of services may differ across different types of settings.

The microeconomics of abortion: A scoping review and analysis of the economic consequences for abortion care-seekers

Background

The economic consequences of abortion care and abortion policies for individuals occur directly and indirectly. We lack synthesis of the economic costs, impacts, benefit or value of abortion care at the micro-level (i.e., individuals and households). This scoping review examines the microeconomic costs, benefits and consequences of abortion care and policies.

Methods and findings

Searches were conducted in eight electronic databases and applied inclusion/exclusion criteria using the PRISMA extension for Scoping Reviews. For inclusion, studies must have examined at least one of the following outcomes: costs, impacts, benefits, and value of abortion care or abortion policies. Quantitative and qualitative data were extracted for descriptive statistics and thematic analysis. Of the 230 included microeconomic studies, costs are the most frequently reported microeconomic outcome (n = 180), followed by impacts (n = 84), benefits (n = 39), and values (n = 26). Individual-level costs of abortion-related care have implications for the timing and type of care sought, globally. In contexts requiring multiple referrals or follow-up visits, these costs are multiplied. The ways in which people pay for abortion-related costs are diverse. The intersection between micro-level costs and delay(s) to abortion-related care is substantial. Individuals forego other costs and expenditures, or are pushed further into debt and/or poverty, in order to fund abortion-related care. The evidence base on the economic impacts of policy or law change is from high-income countries, dominated by studies from the United States.

Conclusions

Delays underpinned by economic factors can thwart care-seeking, affect the type of care sought, and impact the gestational age at which care is sought or reached. The evidence base includes little evidence on the micro-level costs for adolescents. Specific sub-groups of abortion care-seekers (transgendered and/or disabled people) are absent from the evidence and it is likely that they may experience higher direct and indirect costs because they may experience greater barriers to abortion care.

"I'll just deal with this on my own": a qualitative exploration of experiences with self-managed abortion in the United States

Background

A growing body of evidence indicates that some people seek options to terminate a pregnancy without medical assistance, but experiences doing so have largely been documented only among people accessing a clinic-based abortion. We aim to describe self-managed abortion (SMA) experiences of people recruited outside of clinics, including their motivations for SMA, pregnancy confirmation and decision-making processes, method choices, and clinical outcomes.

Methods

In 2017, we conducted 14 in-depth interviews with self-identified females of reproductive age who recently reported in an online survey administered to Ipsos’ KnowledgePanel that, since 2000, they had attempted SMA while living in the United States. We asked participants about their reproductive histories, experiences seeking reproductive health care, and SMA experiences. We used an iterative process to develop codes and analyzed transcripts using thematic content analysis methods.

Results

Motivations and perceptions of effectiveness varied by whether participants had confirmed the pregnancy prior to SMA. Participants who confirmed their pregnancies chose SMA because it was convenient, accessible, and private. Those who did not test for pregnancy were motivated by a preference for autonomy and felt empowered by the ability to try something on their own before seeking facility-based care. Participants prioritized methods that were safe and available, though not always effective. Most used herbs or over-the-counter medications; none used self-sourced abortion medications, mifepristone and/or misoprostol. Five participants obtained facility-based abortions and one participant decided to continue the pregnancy after attempting SMA. The remaining eight reported being no longer pregnant after SMA. None of the participants sought care for  SMA complications; one participant saw a provider to confirm abortion completion.

Conclusions

There are many types of SMA experiences. In addition to those who pursue SMA as a last resort (after facing barriers to facility-based care) or as a first resort (because they prefer homeopathic remedies), our findings show that some individuals view SMA as a potential interim step worth trying after suspecting pregnancy and before accessing facility-based care. These people in particular would benefit from a medication abortion product available over the counter, online, or in the form of a missed-period pill.

Some people in the United States (US) attempt to end a pregnancy on their own without medical supervision. What we know about this experience comes from studies focused on people who go to clinics. In this study, we conducted 14 interviews with self-identified women ages 18–49 who recently reported attempting to end a pregnancy on their own and who were recruited outside of the clinic setting. We asked participants about their fertility histories, experiences seeking reproductive health care, and experiences ending a pregnancy without medical assistance. Those who took a pregnancy test and then chose to end the pregnancy on their own did so because it was convenient, accessible, and private. Those who did not test for pregnancy felt empowered by the ability to try something on their own before seeking facility-based care. All participants prioritized methods that were safe and available, though not always effective. After they attempted to end the pregnancy on their own, five participants accessed abortion care in facilities, one decided to continue the pregnancy, and eight were no longer pregnant. Our findings show that, in addition to people who end a pregnancy on their own as a last resort (after facing barriers to facility-based care) or as a first resort (because of preferences for homeopathic methods), a third group values having an interim step to try after suspecting pregnancy and before accessing facility-based care. These people would particularly benefit from a medication abortion product available over the counter, online, or in the form of a missed-period pill.

Greasing the wheels: The impact of COVID-19 on US physician attitudes and practices regarding medication abortion

OBJECTIVE

To explore US provider perspectives about self-sourced medication abortion and how their attitudes and clinic practices changed in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted a multi-method study of survey and interview data. We performed 40 baseline interviews and surveys in spring 2019 and 36 follow-up surveys and ten interviews one year later. We compared pre- and post-Likert scale responses of provider views on the importance of different aspects of standard medication abortion assessment and evaluation (e.g., related to ultrasounds and blood-typing). We performed content analysis of the follow-up interviews using deductive-inductive analysis.

RESULTS

Survey results revealed that clinics substantially changed their medication abortion protocols in response to COVID-19, with more than half increasing their gestational age limits and introducing telemedicine for follow-up of a medication abortion. Interview analysis suggested that physicians were more supportive of self-sourced medication abortion in response to changing clinic protocols that decreased in-clinic assessment and evaluation for medication abortion, and as a result of physicians' altered assessments of risk in the context of COVID-19. Having evidence already in place that supported these practice changes made the implementation of new protocols more efficient, while working in a state with restrictive abortion policies thwarted the flexibility of clinics to adapt to changes in standards of care.

CONCLUSION

This exploratory study reveals that the COVID-19 pandemic has altered clinical assessment of risk and has shifted practice towards a less medicalized model. Further work to facilitate person-centered abortion information and care can build on initial modifications in response to the pandemic.

IMPLICATIONS

COVID-19 has shifted clinician perception of risk and has catalyzed a change in clinical protocols for medication abortion. However, state laws and policies that regulate medication abortion limit physician ability to respond to changes in risk assessment.

Attitudes of US adults toward using telemedicine to prescribe medication abortion during COVID-19: A mixed methods study

OBJECTIVES

We explored public opinion about using telemedicine to provide medication abortion during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. We also investigated the associations between socio-demographic characteristics and support for using telemedicine in this context and explored factors that influenced respondents' attitudes on the topic.

STUDY DESIGN

In a nationally representative, web-based survey of US adults (n = 711), we asked open- and closed-ended questions about using telemedicine to prescribe medication abortion during COVID-19. We used multinomial logistic regression to assess the relationship between socio-demographic characteristics, endorsement of abortion labels, and political affiliation and support for telemedicine in this circumstance. Then, we conducted content and thematic analyses with the open-ended data to explore what influenced respondents' opinions.

RESULTS

Overall, 332 (44%) of respondents supported using telemedicine for medication abortion during the pandemic; 237 (35%) opposed and 138 (21%) were unsure. Respondents who identified as prochoice were more likely to support using telemedicine for abortion during the pandemic than those who identified as prolife were to oppose it in this context (RRR 2.95; 95% CI 1.31-6.64). Via our content and thematic analysis, we identified that concerns about safety, the legitimacy of telemedicine, and the belief that abortion should occur as early in the pregnancy as possible influenced respondents' beliefs about using telemedicine for medication abortion.

CONCLUSIONS

More respondents supported using telemedicine for medication abortion during COVID-19 than opposed it. Among respondents who expressed support, most thought that medication abortion was safe and that telemedicine was equivalent to the in-person provision of care.

IMPLICATIONS

There appears to be support among US adults for the provision of medication abortion via telemedicine during COVID-19. Policymakers may consider public sentiment as well as clinical evidence when considering legislation about abortion.

Developing and validating the Psychosocial Burden among people Seeking Abortion Scale (PB-SAS)

While there is a large body of research demonstrating that having an abortion is not associated with adverse mental health outcomes, less research has examined which factors may contribute to elevated levels of mental health symptoms at the time of abortion seeking. This study aims to develop and validate a new tool to measure dimensions of psychosocial burden experienced by people seeking abortion in the United States. To develop scale items, we reviewed the literature including existing measures of stress and anxiety and conducted interviews with experts in abortion care and with patients seeking abortion. Thirty-five items were administered to 784 people seeking abortion at four facilities located in three U.S. states. We used exploratory factor analysis (EFA) to reduce items and identify key domains of psychosocial burden. We assessed the predictive validity of the overall scale and each sub-scale, by assessing their associations with validated measures of perceived stress, anxiety, and depression using multivariable linear regression models. Factor analyses revealed a 12-item factor solution measuring psychosocial burden seeking abortion, with four subdomains: structural challenges, pregnancy decision-making, lack of autonomy, and others' reactions to the pregnancy. The alpha reliability coefficients were acceptable for the overall scale (α = 0.83) and each subscale (ranging from α = 0.82-0.85). In adjusted analyses, the overall scale was significantly associated with stress, anxiety and depression; each subscale was also significantly associated with each mental health outcome. This new scale offers a practical tool for providers and researchers to empirically document the factors associated with people's psychological well-being at the time of seeking an abortion. Findings suggest that the same restrictions that claim to protect people from mental health harm may be increasing people's psychosocial burden and contributing to adverse psychological outcomes at the time of seeking abortion.

Medication to Manage Abortion and Miscarriage

Abortion and miscarriage are common, affecting millions of US women each year. By age 45, one in four women in the USA will have had an abortion, and at least as many will have had a miscarriage. Most individuals seeking abortion services do so before 10 weeks' gestation when medication abortions are a safe and effective option, using a regimen of oral mifepristone followed by misoprostol tablets. When a pregnancy is non-viable before 13 weeks' gestation, it is referred to as an early pregnancy loss or miscarriage and can be managed using the same mifepristone and misoprostol regimen. Given their safety and efficacy, mifepristone and misoprostol can be offered in ambulatory settings without special equipment or on-site emergency services. As more patients find it difficult to access clinical care when faced with an undesired pregnancy or a miscarriage, it is important for general internists and primary care providers to become familiar with how to use medications to manage these common conditions. We summarize the most recent evidence regarding the use of mifepristone with misoprostol for early abortion and miscarriage. We discuss clinical considerations and resources for integrating mifepristone and misoprostol into clinical practice. By learning to prescribe mifepristone and misoprostol, clinicians can expand access to time-sensitive health services for vulnerable populations.

Knowledge, interest, and motivations surrounding self-managed medication abortion among patients at three Texas clinics

BACKGROUND

A rapid increase in restrictive abortion legislation in the United States has sparked renewed interest in self-managed abortion as a response to clinic access barriers. Yet little is known about knowledge of, interest in, and experiences of self-managed medication abortion among patients who obtain abortion care in a clinic.

OBJECTIVES

We examined patients' knowledge of, interest in, and experience with self-managed medication abortion before presenting to the clinic. We characterized the clinic- and person-level factors associated with these measures. Finally, we examined the reasons why patients express an interest in or consider self-management before attending the clinic.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We surveyed 1502 abortion patients at 3 Texas clinics in McAllen, San Antonio, and Fort Worth. All individuals seeking abortion care who could complete the survey in English or Spanish were invited to participate in an anonymous survey conducted using iPads. The overall response rate was 90%. We examined the prevalence of 4 outcome variables, both overall and separately by site: (1) knowledge of self-managed medication abortion; (2) having considered self-managing using medications before attending the clinic; (3) interest in medication self-management as an alternative to accessing care at the clinic; and (4) having sought or tried any method of self-management before attending the clinic. We used binary logistic regression models to explore the clinic- and patient-level factors associated with these outcome variables. Finally, we analyzed the reasons reported by those who had considered medication self-management before attending the clinic, as well as the reasons reported by those who would be interested in medication self-management as an alternative to in-clinic care.

RESULTS

Among all respondents, 30% knew about abortion medications available outside the clinic setting (37% in Fort Worth, 33% in McAllen, 19% in San Antonio, P < .001), and among those with prior knowledge, 28% had considered using this option before coming to the clinic (36% in McAllen, 25% in Fort Worth, 21% in San Antonio, P = .028). Among those without prior knowledge of self-management, 39% expressed interest in this option instead of coming to the clinic (54% in San Antonio, 30% in McAllen, 29% in Fort Worth, P < .001). Overall, 13% had sought out or tried any method of self-management before presenting to the clinic (16% in McAllen and 15% in Fort Worth vs 9% in San Antonio, P < .001). Experiencing barriers to clinic access was associated with having considered medication self-management (odds ratio, 2.2; 95% confidence interval, 1.7-3.0) and with seeking or trying any method of self-management before attending the clinic (odds ratio, 1.9; 95% confidence interval, 1.3-2.7). Difficulty affording the cost of in-clinic care was the most commonly cited reason for having considering medication self-management before attending the clinic. Reasons for interest in medication self-management as an alternative to clinic care included both access barriers and preferences for the privacy and comfort of home.

CONCLUSION

Considering or attempting self-managed abortion may be part of the pathway to seeking in-clinic care, particularly among those experiencing access barriers. However, considerable interest in medication self-management as an alternative to the clinic also suggests a demand for more autonomous abortion care options.

Online access to abortion medications: a review of utilization and clinical outcomes

We performed a search in PubMed and Web of Science on the self-use of abortion medication after online access. Studies published between January 1, 1995, and March 31, 2019, were considered. We included studies of online services that were (i) led by healthcare staff (n = 14), (ii) led by non-healthcare staff (n = 4), and (iii) providing noninteractive access (n = 17). Our outcomes were utilization (frequency and demand for services), acceptability for women, safety, and success rate. Key findings: Women are increasingly using the Internet to access abortion medication. Available services are of varying quality. Women accessing noninteractive services report feelings of distress related to the lack of medical guidance, and the demand for interactive guidance through the abortion process is high. Women using services led by healthcare staff report high rates of satisfaction and similar rates of clinical outcomes as those of in-person abortion care.