Efficacy, Safety, and Acceptability of Low-Dose Mifepristone and Self-Administered Misoprostol for Ultra-Early Medical Abortion: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Efficacy and safety of medical termination of pregnancy in a regional primary care setting

BACKGROUND

Australia has demonstrated high efficacy and safety of medical termination of pregnancy (MToP) using a mifepristone-buccal misoprostol regime. The provision of medical termination services in primary care has the potential to alleviate access barriers, particularly in rural and regional populations. Large-scale data are needed to support the expansion of this model.

AIM

The aim was to determine the efficacy and safety of nurse-led MToP within a regional general practice clinic.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study of patients prescribed MToP from October 2014 to April 2020. Clinic nurses assessed patient eligibility and provided information, non-directive counselling and instructions. The general practitioner then confirmed eligibility, obtained informed consent and prescribed. Patients were administered 200 mg of mifepristone orally in a pharmacy and then self-administered 800-μg buccal misoprostol 36-48 h later at home.

RESULTS

A total of 998 patients were included in this study, with the median patient age being 27.3 years and 30.3% of patients travelling over 100 km to access the service. MToP was successful in 965 (96.7%) patients. There were 36 (3.6%) complications, of which 33 were incomplete MToP. Haemorrhage requiring transfusion, pain requiring hospital treatment and suspected infection were rare, each having a frequency of one (0.1%). Our follow-up rate was 74.8%, with a strong correlation identified between increased gestational age and decreased follow-up (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

This study is a large Australian example demonstrating high efficacy and safety of nurse-led MToP within regional general practice. The establishment of similar services in rural and regional Australia may address geographical and financial barriers to termination access.

Impact of approval of home use of misoprostol in England on access to medical abortion: An interrupted time series analysis

OBJECTIVE

In 2018, the Department of Health and Social Care in England approved the use of misoprostol at home for early medical abortions, following administration of mifepristone at clinic. The objective of the present study was to assess the impact of the approval of home administration of misoprostol in England on access to medical abortion, assessed through proxy measures of the proportion of all abortions that were medical and gestational age.

METHODS

This study uses the clinical data from the British Pregnancy Advisory Service on abortions in England in years 2018-2019, containing demographic and procedure characteristics of patients. We conducted an interrupted time series analysis to establish the differences before and after the approval in access to medical abortion, measured by the proportion of all abortions that were medical, and gestational age. The analysis also examined whether these changes were equitable, with focus on area-level deprivation.

RESULTS

The analysis of the data (145 529 abortions) suggested that there was an increase in the proportion of medical abortions and decrease in gestational age of abortions after the approval. Compared with the situation if former trends had continued, the actual proportion of early medical abortions was 4.2% higher in December 2019, and the mean gestational age 3.4 days lower. We found that the acceleration of existing trends in increase in proportion of medical abortions and decrease in gestational age were larger in the most deprived quintiles and in those reporting a disability, but not equal across ethnic groups, with Black and Black British women experiencing little change in trajectories post-approval.

CONCLUSION

The approval of home use of misoprostol as part of an early medical abortion regimen in England was associated with material and equitable improvements in abortion access. Pre-approval trends toward greater uptake of medical abortion and declining gestational age were accelerated post-approval and were greatest in the most deprived areas of England, but not across all racial/ethnic groups. The present findings strongly support the continuation or introduction of home management of medical abortions.

At-home urine pregnancy test assessment after mifepristone and misoprostol for undesired pregnancy of unknown location

OBJECTIVES

The ideal assessment after mifepristone and misoprostol for undesired pregnancy of unknown location (PUL) is unknown.

STUDY DESIGN

We prospectively followed patients at Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts (2019-2021) with PUL who received immediate mifepristone and misoprostol with serial at-home urine pregnancy tests (UPT) and in-office serum HCGs.

RESULTS

Of 13 patients, 10 had a successful medication abortion. For those who completed UPTs (N = 9), all were negative by Day 14. Two abnormal pregnancies had positive UPTs on Day 14.

CONCLUSION

A negative UPT on Day 14 may help determine complete abortion after medication abortion for undesired PUL. A positive UPT on Day 14 warrants further evaluation.

IMPLICATION

Patients taking mifepristone and misoprostol in the setting of undesired PUL who cannot access serum testing may consider an at-home UPT to confirm complete abortion.

Comparison of mifepristone plus misoprostol with misoprostol alone for first trimester medical abortion: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective

To compare mifepristone plus a misoprostol-combined regimen with misoprostol alone in the medical abortion of first trimester pregnancy.

Methods

An internet-based search of available literature was performed using text words contained in titles and abstracts. PubMed/Medline, Cochrane CENTRAL, EMBASE, and Google scholar were used to locate English-based articles published until December 2021. Studies fulfilling the inclusion criteria were selected, appraised, and assessed for methodological quality. The included studies were pooled for meta-analysis, and the results were presented in risk ratio at a 95% confidence interval.

Findings

Nine studies comprising 2,052 participants (1,035 intervention and 1,017 controls) were considered. Primary endpoints were complete expulsion, incomplete expulsion, missed abortion, and ongoing pregnancy. The intervention was found to more likely induce complete expulsion irrespective of gestational age (RR: 1.19; 95% CI: 1.14–1.25). The administration of misoprostol 800 mcg after 24 h of mifepristone pre-treatment in the intervention group more likely induced complete expulsion (RR: 1.23; 95% CI: 1.17–1.30) than after 48 h. The intervention group was also more likely to experience complete expulsion when misoprostol was used either vaginally (RR: 1.16; 95% CI: 1.09–1.17) or buccally (RR: 1.23; 95% CI: 1.16–1.30). The intervention was more effective in the subgroup with a negative foetal heartbeat at reducing incomplete abortion (RR: 0.45; 95% CI: 0.26–0.78) compared with the control group. The intervention more likely reduced both missed abortion (RR: 0.21; 95% CI: 0.08–0.91) and ongoing pregnancy (RR: 0.12; 95% CI: 0.05–0.26). Fever was less likely to be reported (RR: 0.78; 95% CI: 0.12–0.89), whereas the subjective experience of bleeding was more likely to be encountered (RR: 1.31; 95% CI: 1.13–1.53) by the intervention group.

Conclusion

The review strengthened the theory that a combined mifepristone and misoprostol regimen can be an effective medical management for inducing abortions during first trimester pregnancy in all contexts. Specifically, there is a high-level certainty of evidence on complete expulsion during the early stage and its ability to reduce both missed and ongoing pregnancies.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42019134213, identifier CRD42019134213.

Medical Abortion before Confirmed Intrauterine Pregnancy: A Systematic Review

"Very early medical abortion" (VEMA) refers to medical abortion (with mifepristone and misoprostol) before intrauterine pregnancy is visualized on ultrasound. Our aim is to present the current evidence on efficacy, safety (focused on ectopic pregnancies), and how to assess treatment success of VEMA. We conducted a systematic review of studies reporting outcomes of VEMA. The field is small and so our objective was to map all relevant literature, without conducting meta-analysis. We searched PubMed, Medline, and Embase on April 19, 2022. We conducted a narrative synthesis of the evidence. A total of 373 articles were identified. Six articles (representing four observational and one pilot trial) were included in the final review. Across all included studies, treatment efficacy ranged between 91 and 100%. Prevalence of ectopic pregnancy was low and very few cases (n = 2) of ruptures were reported. Most studies used serial serum human chorionic gonadotrophin (s-hCG) levels to determine success of abortion; one study used low sensitivity urine hCG. From the available evidence, VEMA appears to be efficacious and does not appear to cause harm to ectopic pregnancies. Treatment can be assessed with pre- and postabortion s-hCG. Good quality, randomized controlled trial evidence is needed to best inform practice.

Medical methods for first trimester abortion

BACKGROUND

Medical abortion became an alternative method of pregnancy termination following the development of prostaglandins and antiprogesterone in the 1970s and 1980s. Recently, synthesis inhibitors of oestrogen (such as letrozole) have also been used to enhance efficacy. The most widely researched drugs are prostaglandins (such as misoprostol, which has a strong uterotonic effect), mifepristone, mifepristone with prostaglandins, and letrozole with prostaglandins. More evidence is needed to identify the best dosage, regimen, and route of administration to optimise patient outcomes. This is an update of a review last published in 2011.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effectiveness and side effects of different medical methods for first trimester abortion.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Global Health, and LILACs on 28 February 2021. We also searched Clinicaltrials.gov and the World Health Organization's (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and reference lists of retrieved papers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared different medical methods for abortion before the 12th week of gestation. The primary outcome is failure to achieve complete abortion. Secondary outcomes are mortality, surgical evacuation, ongoing pregnancy at follow-up, time until passing of conceptus, blood transfusion, side effects and women's dissatisfaction with the method.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected and evaluated studies for inclusion, and assessed the risk of bias. We processed data using Review Manager 5 software. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 99 studies in the review (58 from the original review and 41 new studies). 1. Combined regimen mifepristone/prostaglandin Mifepristone dose: high-dose (600 mg) compared to low-dose (200 mg) mifepristone probably has similar effectiveness in achieving complete abortion (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.33; I2 = 0%; 4 RCTs, 3494 women; moderate-certainty evidence). Prostaglandin dose: 800 µg misoprostol probably reduces abortion failure compared to 400 µg (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.78; I2= 0%; 3 RCTs, 4424 women; moderate-certainty evidence). Prostaglandin timing: misoprostol administered on day one probably achieves more success on complete abortion than on day three (RR 1.94, 95% CI 1.05 to 3.58; 1489 women; 1 RCT; moderate-certainty evidence). Administration strategy: there may be no difference in failure of complete abortion with self-administration at home compared with hospital administration (RR 1.63, 95% CI 0.68 to 3.94; I2 = 84%; 2263 women; 4 RCTs; low-certainty evidence), but failure may be higher when administered by nurses in hospital compared to by doctors in hospital (RR 2.69, 95% CI 1.39 to 5.22; I2 = 66%; 3 RCTs, 3056 women; low-certainty evidence). Administration route: oral misoprostol probably leads to more failures than the vaginal route (RR 2.38, 95% CI 1.46 to 3.87; I2 = 39%; 3 RCTs, 1704 women; moderate-certainty evidence) and may be associated with more frequent side effects such as nausea (RR 1.14, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.26; I2 = 0%; 2 RCTs, 1380 women; low-certainty evidence) and diarrhoea (RR 1.80 95% CI 1.49 to 2.17; I2 = 0%; 2 RCTs, 1379 women). Compared with the vaginal route, complete abortion failure is probably lower with sublingual (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.22 to 2.11; I2 = 59%; 2 RCTs, 3229 women; moderate-certainty evidence) and may be lower with buccal administration (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.46; I2 = 0%; 2 RCTs, 479 women; low-certainty evidence), but sublingual or buccal routes may lead to more side effects. Women may experience more vomiting with sublingual compared to buccal administration (RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.77; low-certainty evidence). 2. Mifepristone alone versus combined regimen The efficacy of mifepristone alone in achieving complete abortion compared to combined mifepristone/prostaglandin up to 12 weeks is unclear (RR of failure 3.25, 95% CI 0.81 to 13.09; I2 = 83%; 3 RCTs, 273 women; very low-certainty evidence). 3. Prostaglandin alone versus combined regimen Nineteen studies compared prostaglandin alone to a combined regimen (prostaglandin combined with mifepristone, letrozole, estradiol valerate, tamoxifen, or methotrexate). Compared to any of the combination regimens, misoprostol alone may increase the risk for failure to achieve complete abortion (RR of failure 2.39, 95% CI 1.89 to 3.02; I2 = 64%; 18 RCTs, 3471 women; low-certainty evidence), and with more diarrhoea. 4. Prostaglandin alone (route of administration) Oral misoprostol alone may lead to more failures in complete abortion than the vaginal route (RR 3.68, 95% CI 1.56 to 8.71, 2 RCTs, 216 women; low-certainty evidence). Failure to achieve complete abortion may be slightly reduced with sublingual compared with vaginal (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.28; I2 = 87%; 5 RCTs, 2705 women; low-certainty evidence) and oral administration (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.11 to 2.99; I2 = 66%; 2 RCTs, 173 women). Failure to achieve complete abortion may be similar or slightly higher with sublingual administration compared to buccal administration (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.74; 1 study, 401 women).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Safe and effective medical abortion methods are available. Combined regimens (prostaglandin combined with mifepristone, letrozole, estradiol valerate, tamoxifen, or methotrexate) may be more effective than single agents (prostaglandin alone or mifepristone alone). In the combined regimen, the dose of mifepristone can probably be lowered to 200 mg without significantly decreasing effectiveness. Vaginal misoprostol is probably more effective than oral administration, and may have fewer side effects than sublingual or buccal. Some results are limited by the small numbers of participants on which they are based. Almost all studies were conducted in settings with good access to emergency services, which may limit the generalisability of these results.

Mifepristone and Misoprostol for Undesired Pregnancy of Unknown Location

OBJECTIVE

To compare immediate initiation with delayed initiation of medication abortion among patients with an undesired pregnancy of unknown location.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study used electronic medical record data from the Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts (2014-2019) for patients who requested medication abortion with a last menstrual period (LMP) of 42 days or less and pregnancy of unknown location (no gestational sac) on initial ultrasonogram. Clinicians could initiate medication abortion with mifepristone followed by misoprostol while simultaneously excluding ectopic pregnancy with serial serum human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) testing (same-day-start group) or establish a diagnosis with serial hCG tests and repeat ultrasonogram before initiating treatment (delay-for-diagnosis group). We compared primary safety outcomes (time to diagnosis of pregnancy location [rule out ectopic], emergency department visits, adverse events, and nonadherence with follow-up) between groups. We also reported secondary efficacy outcomes: time to complete abortion, successful medication abortion (no uterine aspiration), and ongoing pregnancy.

RESULTS

Of 5,619 medication abortion visits for patients with an LMP of 42 days or less, 452 patients had pregnancy of unknown location (8.0%). Three patients underwent immediate uterine aspiration, 55 had same-day start, and 394 had delay for diagnosis. Thirty-one patients (7.9%), all in the delay-for-diagnosis group, were treated for ectopic pregnancy, including four that were ruptured. Among patients with no major ectopic pregnancy risk factors (n=432), same-day start had shorter time to diagnosis (median 5.0 days vs 9.0 days; P=.005), with no significant difference in emergency department visits (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.90, 95% CI 0.43-1.88) or nonadherence with follow-up (aOR 0.92, 95% CI 0.39-2.15). Among patients who proceeded with abortion (n=270), same-day start had shorter time to complete abortion (median 5.0 days vs 19.0 days; P<.001). Of those who had medication abortion with known outcome (n=170), the rate of successful medication abortion was lower (85.4% vs 96.7%; P=.013) and the rate of ongoing pregnancy was higher (10.4% vs 2.5%; P=.041) among patients in the same-day-start group.

CONCLUSION

In patients with undesired pregnancy of unknown location, immediate initiation of medication abortion is associated with more rapid exclusion of ectopic pregnancy and pregnancy termination but lower abortion efficacy.

Effectiveness, safety and acceptability of medical abortion at home versus in the clinic: a systematic review and meta-analysis in response to COVID-19

BACKGROUND

Increased access to home-based medical abortion may offer women a convenient, safe and effective abortion method, reduce burdens on healthcare systems and support social distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic. Home-based medical abortion is defined as any abortion where mifepristone, misoprostol or both medications are taken at home.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised studies (NRSs) were conducted. We searched databases from inception to 10 July 2019 and 14 June 2020. Successful abortion was the main outcome of interest. Eligible studies were RCTs and NRSs studies with a concurrent comparison group comparing home versus clinic-based medical abortion. Risk ratios (RRs) and their 95% CIs were calculated. Estimates were calculated using a random-effects model. We used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach to assess risk of bias by outcome and to evaluate the overall quality of the evidence.

RESULTS

We identified 6277 potentially eligible published studies. Nineteen studies (3 RCTs and 16 NRSs) were included with 11 576 women seeking abortion up to 9 weeks gestation. Neither the RCTs nor the NRS found any difference between home-based and clinic-based administration of medical abortion in having a successful abortion (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.01, I2=0%; RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.01, I2=52%, respectively). The certainty of the evidence for the 16 NRSs was downgraded from low to very low due to high risk of bias and publication bias. The certainty of the evidence for the three RCTs was downgraded from high to moderate by one level for high risk of bias.

CONCLUSION

Home-based medical abortion is effective, safe and acceptable to women. This evidence should be used to expand women's abortion options and ensure access to abortion for women during COVID-19 and beyond.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020183171.

Prioritizing Desiredness in Pregnancy of Unknown Location: An Algorithm for Patient-Centered Care

Patient-centered care is one of the six aims for improvement in health care quality outlined by the National Academy of Medicine (previously known as the Institute of Medicine). We propose an algorithm for patients who are presenting with a pregnancy of unknown location that emphasizes pregnancy desiredness to improve patient-centered care. Health care professionals should assess pregnancy desiredness at a patient's initial consultation for evaluation of pregnancy of unknown location; desiredness, along with other clinical criteria, should guide management. For women with an undesired pregnancy, health care professionals should offer expedient active management. Uterine aspiration will allow for quick clinical diagnosis and resolution of the pregnancy. Alternatively, for women with a desired pregnancy or for those who are ambivalent, we recommend careful conservative management. Adopting this algorithm will recenter the patient in the complex management of pregnancy of unknown location.

The mesoeconomics of abortion: A scoping review and analysis of the economic effects of abortion on health systems

BACKGROUND

Despite the high incidence of abortion around the globe, we lack synthesis of the known economic consequences of abortion care and abortion policies at the mesoeconomic level (i.e. health systems and communities). This scoping review examines the mesoeconomic costs, benefits, impacts, and values of abortion care and policies.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

Searches were conducted in eight electronic databases. We conducted the searches and application of inclusion/exclusion criteria using the PRISMA extension for Scoping Reviews. For inclusion, studies must have examined at least one of the following outcomes: costs, benefits, impacts, and value of abortion care or abortion policies. Quantitative and qualitative data were extracted for descriptive statistics and thematic analysis. Of the 150 included mesoeconomic studies, costs to health systems are the most frequently reported mesoeconomic outcome (n = 116), followed by impacts (n = 40), benefits (n = 17), and values (n = 11). Within health facilities and health systems, the costs of providing abortion services vary greatly, particularly given the range with which researchers identify and cost services. Financial savings can be realized while maintaining or even improving quality of abortion services. Adapting to changing laws and policies is costly for health facilities. American policies on abortion economically impact health systems and facilities both domestically and abroad. Providing post-abortion care requires a disproportionate amount of health facility resources.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence base has consolidated around abortion costs to health systems and health facilities in high-income countries more than in low- or middle-income countries. Little is known about the economic impacts of abortion on communities or the mesoeconomics of abortion in the Middle East and North Africa. Methodologically, review papers are the most frequent study type, indicating that researchers rely on evidence from a core set of costing papers. Studies generating new primary data on mesoeconomic outcomes are needed to strengthen the evidence base.

Self-administered versus provider-administered medical abortion

BACKGROUND

The advent of medical abortion has improved access to safe abortion procedures. Medical abortion procedures involve either administering mifepristone followed by misoprostol or a misoprostol-only regimen. The drugs are commonly administered in the presence of clinicians, which is known as provider-administered medical abortion. In self-administered medical abortion, drugs are administered by the woman herself without the supervision of a healthcare provider during at least one stage of the drug protocol. Self-administration of medical abortion has the potential to provide women with control over the abortion process. In settings where there is a shortage of healthcare providers, self-administration may reduce the burden on the health system. However, it remains unclear whether self-administration of medical abortion is effective and safe. It is important to understand whether women can safely and effectively terminate their own pregnancies when having access to accurate and adequate information, high-quality drugs, and facility-based care in case of complications.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effectiveness, safety, and acceptability of self-administered versus provider-administered medical abortion in any setting.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE in process and other non-indexed citations, Embase, CINAHL, POPLINE, LILACS, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO ICTRP, and Google Scholar from inception to 10 July 2019.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective cohort studies with a concurrent comparison group, using study designs that compared medical abortion by self-administered versus provider-administered methods.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently extracted the data, and we performed a meta-analysis where appropriate using Review Manager 5. Our primary outcome was successful abortion (effectiveness), defined as complete uterine evacuation without the need for surgical intervention. Ongoing pregnancy (the presence of an intact gestational sac) was our secondary outcome measuring success or effectiveness. We assessed statistical heterogeneity with Chi² tests and I² statistics using a cut-off point of P < 0.10 to indicate statistical heterogeneity. Quality assessment of the data used the GRADE approach. We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 18 studies (two RCTs and 16 non-randomized studies (NRSs)) comprising 11,043 women undergoing early medical abortion (≤ 9 weeks gestation) in 10 countries. Sixteen studies took place in low-to-middle income resource settings and two studies were in high-resource settings. One NRS study received analgesics from a pharmaceutical company. Five NRSs and one RCT did not report on funding; nine NRSs received all or partial funding from an anonymous donor. Five NRSs and one RCT received funding from government agencies, private foundations, or non-profit bodies. The intervention in the evidence is predominantly from women taking mifepristone in the presence of a healthcare provider, and subsequently taking misoprostol without healthcare provider supervision (e.g. at home). There is no evidence of a difference in rates of successful abortions between self-administered and provider-administered groups: for two RCTs, risk ratio (RR) 0.99, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.97 to 1.01; 919 participants; moderate certainty of evidence. There is very low certainty of evidence from 16 NRSs: RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.01; 10,124 participants. For the outcome of ongoing pregnancy there may be little or no difference between the two groups: for one RCT: RR 1.69, 95% CI 0.41 to 7.02; 735 participants; low certainty of evidence; and very low certainty evidence for 11 NRSs: RR 1.28, 95% CI 0.65 to 2.49; 6691 participants. We are uncertain whether there are any differences in complications requiring surgical intervention, since we found no RCTs and evidence from three NRSs was of very low certainty: for three NRSs: RR 2.14, 95% CI 0.80 to 5.71; 2452 participants.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review shows that self-administering the second stage of early medical abortion procedures is as effective as provider-administered procedures for the outcome of abortion success. There may be no difference for the outcome of ongoing pregnancy, although the evidence for this is uncertain for this outcome. There is very low-certainty evidence for the risk of complications requiring surgical intervention. Data are limited by the scarcity of high-quality research study designs and the presence of risks of bias. This review provides insufficient evidence to determine the safety of self-administration when compared with administering medication in the presence of healthcare provider supervision. Future research should investigate the effectiveness and safety of self-administered medical abortion in the absence of healthcare provider supervision through the entirety of the medical abortion protocol (e.g. during administration of mifepristone or as part of a misoprostol-only regimen) and at later gestational ages (i.e. more than nine weeks). In the absence of any supervision from medical personnel, research is needed to understand how best to inform and support women who choose to self-administer, including when to seek clinical care.

Self-management of first trimester medical termination of pregnancy: a qualitative study of women's experiences

OBJECTIVE

To explore the experiences of women in Scotland who return home to complete medical termination of pregnancy (TOP) ≤63 days of gestation, after being administered with mifepristone and misoprostol at an NHS TOP clinic.

DESIGN

Qualitative interview study.

SETTING

One National Health Service health board (administrative) area in Scotland.

POPULATION OR SAMPLE

Women in Scotland who had undergone medical TOP ≤63 days, and self-managed passing the pregnancy at home; recruited from three clinics in one NHS health board area between January and July 2014.

METHODS

In-depth, semi-structured interviews with 44 women in Scotland who had recently undergone TOP ≤63 days of gestation, and who returned home to pass the pregnancy. Data were analysed thematically using an approach informed by the Framework method.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Women's experiences of self-management of TOP ≤63 days of gestation.

RESULTS

Key themes emerging from the analysis related to self-administration of misoprostol in clinic; reasons for choosing home self-management; facilitation of self-management and expectation-setting; experiences of getting home; self-managing and monitoring treatment progress; support for self-management (in person and remotely); and pregnancy self-testing to confirm completion.

CONCLUSIONS

Participants primarily found self-administration of misoprostol and home self-management to be acceptable and/or preferable, particularly where this was experienced as a decision made jointly with health professionals. The way in which home self-management is presented to women at clinic requires ongoing attention. Women could benefit from the option of home administration of misoprostol.

TWEETABLE ABSTRACT

Women undergoing medical TOP 63 days found home self-management to be acceptable and/or preferable.