1
|
Heil SKR, Caglayan K, Castillo G, Valenzuela-Mendez C, Lankford CM, Sgro G, Yang M, Downing L, Bhalla M, Davis SM. The impact of state Medicaid coverage of abortion on people accessing care in three states. PERSPECTIVES ON SEXUAL AND REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH 2024. [PMID: 39074851 DOI: 10.1111/psrh.12275] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 07/31/2024]
Abstract
CONTEXT Medicaid is a major funder of reproductive health services, including family planning and pregnancy-related care, especially for people with limited income and people of color. Federal Medicaid funds cannot be used for abortion however 16 states allow state Medicaid funds to pay for abortion. In recent years, Illinois and Maine implemented, and West Virginia discontinued, state Medicaid coverage of abortion. METHODOLOGY With retrospective procedure- and patient-level data obtained from clinics in these three states, we used an interrupted time series design, multivariable regression models, and descriptive statistics to assess changes in procedure volume and patients' share of total procedure price (patient price). RESULTS In Maine and Illinois, implementing state Medicaid coverage of abortion contributed to an immediate overall increase in abortion access (as seen by a rise in monthly procedure volume at the time of the policy's implementation), a decrease in patient price (by 36% in Maine and 44% in Illinois) after policy implementation as compared to pre-implementation, and overall improved access among people of color. Conversely, when West Virginia discontinued coverage, access to care decreased, patient price increased by 130%, and the share of abortion procedures among people of color decreased. CONCLUSIONS In the fragmented abortion access landscape of the post-Roe era, our study provides new evidence that financial assistance offered through state Medicaid policies that cover abortion may be most helpful to those facing traditional structural inequities to access, while discontinuation of Medicaid coverage of abortion further burdens those already economically marginalized.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Susan K R Heil
- American Institutes for Research®, Health Program, Crystal City, Virginia, USA
| | - Koray Caglayan
- American Institutes for Research®, Health Program, Crystal City, Virginia, USA
| | - Graciela Castillo
- American Institutes for Research®, Health Program, Crystal City, Virginia, USA
| | | | | | - Gina Sgro
- American Institutes for Research®, Health Program, Crystal City, Virginia, USA
| | - Manxi Yang
- American Institutes for Research®, Health Program, Crystal City, Virginia, USA
| | - Lori Downing
- American Institutes for Research®, Health Program, Crystal City, Virginia, USA
| | - Meera Bhalla
- American Institutes for Research®, Health Program, Crystal City, Virginia, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Dozier JL, Burke AE, McMahon HV, Berger BO, Quasebarth M, Sufrin C, Bell SO. "Maybe if we weren't in the pandemic, I would have reconsidered": Experiences of abortion care-seeking during the COVID-19 pandemic in Maryland. PERSPECTIVES ON SEXUAL AND REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH 2024; 56:124-135. [PMID: 38655782 DOI: 10.1111/psrh.12265] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 04/26/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To understand the COVID-19 pandemic's impact on abortion care-seeking in Maryland, a state with Medicaid coverage for abortion, high service availability, and laws supporting abortion rights. METHODS We conducted semi-structured telephone interviews with 15 women who had an abortion between January 2021 and March 2022 at a hospital-based clinic in a mid-sized Maryland city. We purposively recruited participants with varied pandemic financial impacts. Interview questions prompted participants to reflect on how the pandemic affected their lives, pregnancy decisions, and experiences seeking abortion care. We analyzed our data for themes. RESULTS All participants had some insurance coverage for their abortion; over half paid using Medicaid. Many participants experienced pandemic financial hardship, with several reporting job, food, and housing insecurity as circumstances influencing their decision to have an abortion. Most women who self-reported minimal financial hardship caused by the pandemic indicated they sought an abortion for reasons unrelated to COVID-19. In contrast, women with economic hardship viewed their pregnancies as unsupportable due to COVID-19 exacerbating financial instability, even when they desired to continue the pregnancy. All participants expressed that having an abortion was the best decision for their lives. Yet, when making decisions about their pregnancy, the most financially disadvantaged women weighed their desires against the pandemic's constraints on their reproductive self-determination. CONCLUSIONS The pandemic changed abortion care-seeking circumstances even in a setting with minimal access barriers. Financial hardship influenced some women to have an abortion for a pregnancy that-while unplanned-they may have preferred to continue.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jessica L Dozier
- Department of Population, Family and Reproductive Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | - Anne E Burke
- Department of Population, Family and Reproductive Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | - Hayley V McMahon
- Department of Health, Behavior and Society, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | - Blair O Berger
- Department of Population, Family and Reproductive Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | - Madeline Quasebarth
- Department of Population, Family and Reproductive Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | - Carolyn Sufrin
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
- Department of Health, Behavior and Society, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | - Suzanne O Bell
- Department of Population, Family and Reproductive Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Smith MH, Broscoe M, Chakraborty P, Hill J, Hood R, McGowan M, Bessett D, Norris AH. COVID-19 and abortion in the Ohio River Valley: A case study of Kentucky, Ohio, and West Virginia. PERSPECTIVES ON SEXUAL AND REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH 2023; 55:178-191. [PMID: 37571959 DOI: 10.1363/psrh.12244] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 08/13/2023]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION During early stages of COVID-19 in the United States, government representatives in Kentucky, Ohio, and West Virginia restricted or threatened to restrict abortion care under elective surgery bans. We examined how abortion utilization changed in these states. METHODOLOGY We examined COVID-19 abortion-related state policies implemented in March and April 2020 using publicly available sources. We analyzed data on abortions by method and gestation and experiences of facility staff, using a survey of 14 facilities. We assessed abortions that took place in February-June 2020 and February-June 2021. RESULTS In February-June 2020 the monthly average abortion count was 1916; 863 (45%) were medication abortions and 229 (12%) were ≥14 weeks gestation. Of 1959 abortions performed across all three states in April 2020, 1319 (67%) were medication abortions and 231 (12%) were ≥14 weeks gestation. The shift toward medication abortion that took place in April 2020 was not observed in April 2021. Although the total abortion count in the three-state region remained steady, West Virginia had the greatest decline in total abortions, Ohio experienced a shift from instrumentation to medication abortions, and Kentucky saw little change. Staff reported increased stress from concerns over health and safety and increased scrutiny by the state and anti-abortion protesters. DISCUSSION Although abortion provision continued in this region, policy changes restricting abortion in Ohio and West Virginia resulted in a decrease in first trimester instrumentation abortions, an overall shift toward medication abortion care, and an increase in stress among facility staff during the early phase of COVID-19.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mikaela H Smith
- Division of Epidemiology, College of Public Health, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA
| | - Molly Broscoe
- Department of Sociology, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
| | - Payal Chakraborty
- Department of Population Medicine, Harvard Medical School and Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
- Department of Epidemiology, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Jessie Hill
- Case Western Reserve University School of Law, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
| | - Robert Hood
- Department of Epidemiology, Rollins School of Public Health, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
| | - Michelle McGowan
- Biomedical Ethics Research Program, Department of Quantitative Health Sciences, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
- Department of Women's, Gender & Sexuality Studies, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
| | - Danielle Bessett
- Department of Sociology, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
| | - Alison H Norris
- Division of Epidemiology, College of Public Health, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Bell SO, Berger BO, Sufrin C, Dozier JL, Burke AE. An exploratory study of COVID-19-related changes in abortion service availability and use in Washington, DC, Maryland, and Virginia. PERSPECTIVES ON SEXUAL AND REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH 2023; 55:12-22. [PMID: 36751866 DOI: 10.1363/psrh.12220] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/17/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES This exploratory study aimed to assess COVID-19-related changes in abortion service availability and use in Washington, DC, Maryland, and Virginia. DESIGN Data came from a convenience sample of eight abortion clinics in this region. We implemented a cross-sectional survey and collected retrospective aggregate monthly abortion data overall and by facility type, abortion type, and patient characteristics for March 2019-August 2020. We evaluated changes in the distribution of the total number of patients for March-August in 2019 compared to March-August 2020. We also conducted segmented regression analyses and produced scatter plots of monthly abortion patients overall and by facility type, abortion type, and patient characteristics, with separate fitted regression lines from the segmented regression models for the pre- and during-COVID-19 periods. RESULTS Five clinics reported a reduced number of appointments early in the pandemic while four reported increased call volume. There were declines in the monthly abortion trend at hospital-based clinics at the outset of the pandemic. Monthly number of medication abortions increased from March 2020 through August 2020 compared to pre-COVID-19 trends while instrumentation abortions 11 up to 19 weeks decreased. The share of abortions to Black individuals increased during the early phase of the pandemic, as did the monthly trend in abortions among this group. We also saw changes in payment type, with declines in patients paying out-of-pocket. CONCLUSIONS Results revealed differences in abortion services, numbers, and types during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic in Washington, DC, Maryland, and Virginia.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Suzanne O Bell
- Department of Population, Family and Reproductive Health, Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | - Blair O Berger
- Department of Population, Family and Reproductive Health, Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | - Carolyn Sufrin
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
- Department of Health, Behavior, and Society, Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | - Jessica L Dozier
- Department of Population, Family and Reproductive Health, Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | - Anne E Burke
- Department of Population, Family and Reproductive Health, Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
- Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Carpenter E, Gyuras H, Burke KL, Czarnecki D, Bessett D, McGowan M, White K. Seeking abortion care in Ohio and Texas during the COVID-19 pandemic. Contraception 2023; 118:109896. [PMID: 36240904 PMCID: PMC9554324 DOI: 10.1016/j.contraception.2022.09.134] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/21/2021] [Revised: 09/27/2022] [Accepted: 09/30/2022] [Indexed: 01/17/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES Political and public health responses to the COVID-19 pandemic changed provision of abortion care and exacerbated existing barriers. We aimed to explore experiences of individuals seeking abortion care in 2 abortion-restrictive states in the United States where state policies and practice changes disrupted abortion provision during the pandemic. STUDY DESIGN We conducted 22 semistructured interviews in Texas (n = 10) and Ohio (n = 12) to assess how state executive orders limiting abortion, along with other public health guidance and pandemic-related service delivery changes, affected individuals seeking abortion care. We included individuals 18 years and older who contacted a facility for abortion care between March and November 2020. We coded and analyzed interview transcripts using both inductive and deductive approaches. RESULTS Participants reported obstacles to obtaining their preferred timing and method of abortion. These obstacles placed greater demands on those seeking abortion and resulted in delays in obtaining care for as long as 11 weeks, as well as some being unable to obtain an abortion at all. CONCLUSIONS Political and public health responses to the COVID-19 pandemic - exacerbated pre-pandemic barriers and existing restrictions and constrained options for people seeking abortion in Ohio and Texas. Delays were consequential for all participants, regardless of their ultimate ability to obtain an abortion. IMPLICATIONS During the COVID-19 pandemic, state executive orders and clinic practices exacerbated already constrained access to care. Findings highlight the importance of protecting timely care and the full range of abortion methods. Findings also preview barriers individuals seeking abortion may encounter in states that restrict or ban abortion.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Emma Carpenter
- Texas Policy Evaluation Project, University of Texas-Austin, Austin, TX, United States; Population Research Center, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, United States; Department of Women's, Gender & Sexuality Studies, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, United States.
| | - Hillary Gyuras
- Department of Women's, Gender & Sexuality Studies, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, United States; Ohio Policy Evaluation Network, University of Cincinnati, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Cincinnati OH, United States; College of Public Health, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, United States
| | - Kristen L Burke
- Texas Policy Evaluation Project, University of Texas-Austin, Austin, TX, United States; Population Research Center, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, United States; Department of Women's, Gender & Sexuality Studies, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, United States
| | - Danielle Czarnecki
- Department of Women's, Gender & Sexuality Studies, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, United States; Ohio Policy Evaluation Network, University of Cincinnati, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Cincinnati OH, United States; Department of Sociology, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, United States
| | - Danielle Bessett
- Department of Women's, Gender & Sexuality Studies, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, United States; Ohio Policy Evaluation Network, University of Cincinnati, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Cincinnati OH, United States; Department of Sociology, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, United States
| | - Michelle McGowan
- Department of Women's, Gender & Sexuality Studies, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, United States; Ohio Policy Evaluation Network, University of Cincinnati, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Cincinnati OH, United States; Department of Pediatrics, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, United States; Ethics Center, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH, United States
| | - Kari White
- Texas Policy Evaluation Project, University of Texas-Austin, Austin, TX, United States; Population Research Center, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, United States; Department of Women's, Gender & Sexuality Studies, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, United States; Steve Hicks School of Social Work, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, United States
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Jones RK, Kirstein M, Philbin J. Abortion incidence and service availability in the United States, 2020. PERSPECTIVES ON SEXUAL AND REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH 2022; 54:128-141. [PMID: 36404279 PMCID: PMC10099841 DOI: 10.1363/psrh.12215] [Citation(s) in RCA: 58] [Impact Index Per Article: 29.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/21/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND This study provides a baseline assessment of abortion incidence and service delivery prior to Roe v. Wade being overturned. METHODS We collected information from all facilities known to have provided abortion services in the United States in 2019 and 2020. We examined abortion incidence by state, region and nationally and combined data on number of abortions with population data to estimate abortion rates. We also examined the number of abortion clinics, trends in medication abortion and service disruptions and changes in abortion protocols that occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic. We compare these findings to those of our prior Abortion Provider Census, which collected information for 2017. RESULTS We documented 930,160 abortions in 2020, an 8% increase from 2017. Between 2017 and 2020, abortion incidence increased in all four regions of the country and in a majority of states. The total number of clinics providing abortion care remained stable nationally but increased in the Midwest and the West and declined in the Northeast and South. There were 492,210 medication abortions in 2020, a 45% increase from 2017. A substantial minority of clinics adjusted protocols in response to COVID, most commonly adopting remote pre- and post-abortion counseling. DISCUSSION This study did not address factors behind the increase in abortion. However, this report demonstrates that the need for abortion care was growing just prior to the overturning Roe v. Wade, and the impact of this decision will be even more far-reaching than previously expected.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Jesse Philbin
- Research DivisionGuttmacher InstituteNew YorkNew YorkUSA
| |
Collapse
|