Effectiveness of Self-Managed Medication Abortion Between 9 and 16 Weeks of Gestation

24-Hour Compared With 12-Hour Mifepristone-Misoprostol Interval for Second-Trimester Abortion: A Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

To compare 24-hour and 12-hour mifepristone-to-misoprostol intervals for second-trimester medication abortion.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective randomized controlled trial. Participants were allocated to receive mifepristone either 24 hours or 12 hours before misoprostol administration. The primary outcome was the time from the first misoprostol administration to abortion (induction time). Secondary outcomes included the time from mifepristone to abortion (total abortion time); fetal expulsion percentages at 12, 24, and 48 hours after the first misoprostol dose; side effects proportion; and pain and satisfaction scores. A sample size of 40 per group (N=80) was planned to compare the 24- and 12-hour regimens.

RESULTS

Eighty patients were enrolled between July 2020 and June 2023, with 40 patients per group. Baseline characteristics were comparable between groups. Median induction time was 9.5 hours (95% CI, 10.3-17.8 hours) and 12.5 hours (95% CI, 13.5-20.2 hours) in the 24- and 12-hour interval arms, respectively ( P =.028). Median total abortion time was 33.0 hours (95% CI, 34.2-41.9 hours) and 24.5 hours (95% CI, 25.7-32.4 hours) in the 24- and 12-hour interval groups, respectively ( P <.001). At 12 hours from misoprostol administration, 25 patients (62.5%) in the 24-hour arm and 18 patients (45.0%) in the 12-hour arm completed abortion ( P =.178). At 24 hours from misoprostol administration, 36 patients (90.0%) in the 24-hour arm and 30 patients (75.0%) in the 12-hour arm had complete abortion ( P =.139). The need for additional medication or surgical treatment for uterine evacuation, pain scores, side effects, and satisfaction levels were not different between groups.

CONCLUSION

A 24-hour mifepristone-to-misoprostol regimen for medication abortion in the second trimester provides a median 3-hour shorter induction time compared with the 12-hour interval. However, the median total abortion time was 8.5-hours longer in the 24-hour interval regimen. These findings can aid in shared decision making before medication abortion in the second trimester.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04160221.

PROTOCOL: Abortion and mental health outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis

This is a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of research on mental health outcomes of abortion. Does abortion increase the risk of adverse mental health outcomes? That is the central question for this review. Our review aims to inform policy and practice by locating, critically appraising, and synthesizing empirical evidence on associations between abortion and subsequent mental health outcomes. Given the controversies surrounding this topic and the complex social, political, legal, and ideological contexts in which research and reviews on abortion are conducted, it is especially important to conduct this systematic review and meta-analysis with comprehensive, rigorous, unbiased, and transparent methods. We will include a variety of study designs to enhance understanding of studies' methodological strengths and weaknesses and to identify potential explanations for conflicting results. We will follow open science principles, providing access to our methods, measures, and results, and making data available for re-analysis.

Understanding medication abortion ineligibility due to gestational age among a cohort of patients in Southern California

OBJECTIVE

Medication abortion (MAB) is safe and effective up to 77 days gestation. Limited data are available on how often patients are ineligible for MAB due to advanced gestational age and how many of those ineligible go on to receive procedural abortion.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective analysis of electronic health records from Planned Parenthood of the Pacific Southwest (PPPSW) from January - December 2021. PPPSW has four procedural abortion sites and 15 MAB-only clinics that offered appointments only if last menstrual period-based GA was ≤70 days or unknown. Patients >70 days gestation by intake ultrasound at a MAB-only clinic were referred to a procedural center.

RESULTS

Of 11,684 patients presenting for MAB at MAB-only sites 2224 (19%) did not receive a MAB; 3.8% (N = 444) presented past 70 days gestation and were thus ineligible due to gestational age limits. Of those ineligible (N = 444), 234 (53%) measured between 71-77 days of gestation. Three quarters (75.7%) of those ineligible went on to receive a procedural abortion at PPPSW after a mean wait time of 10 days. In multivariable analysis, no demographic factors were associated with higher odds of receiving a procedural abortion.

CONCLUSIONS

Presenting for MAB past a gestational age limit was uncommon, supporting safety of no-test MAB protocols. A quarter of people ineligible for MAB due to gestational age did not receive a procedural abortion at PPPSW. If MAB were offered up to 77 days, half of patients who were denied MAB due to gestational age could have received MAB, expanding patient access.

IMPLICATIONS

Being ineligible for MAB due to advanced gestational age was uncommon. Increasing MAB gestational age limits from 70 days to 77 days could further improve abortion access.