Termination for fetal anomaly: Are women in England given a choice of method?

Client perspectives on choice of abortion method in England and Wales

INTRODUCTION

The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists and the World Health Organization recommend that services provide a choice between medical and surgical methods of abortion. We analysed qualitative study data to examine patient perspectives on abortion method choice and barriers to meeting them.

METHODS

In-depth interviews with 24 clients who had an abortion at British Pregnancy Advisory Service clinics were carried out between December 2018 and July 2019 to examine perspectives of quality of abortion care. In this article we focus on client perspectives on choice of abortion method. We performed thematic analysis of data relating to choice of abortion method, refined the analysis, interpreted the findings, and organised the data into themes.

RESULTS

Participants' preferences for abortion method were shaped by prior experience of abortion, accessibility and privacy, perceptions of risk and experiences of abortion method, and information gathering and counselling. Participants' ability to obtain their preferred method was impacted by intersecting constraints such as appointment availability, service location and gestational age.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings show that many factors shape participants' preferences for abortion method. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, some abortion services have constrained abortion method choices, with an emphasis on medical abortion and 'no-touch' care. Providers in the UK and beyond should aim to restore and expand more treatment options when the situation allows.

Termination of pregnancy for fetal anomaly: a systematic review of the healthcare experiences and needs of parents

BACKGROUND

Improved technology and advances in clinical testing have resulted in increased detection rates of congenital anomalies during pregnancy, resulting in more parents being confronted with the possibility of terminating a pregnancy for this reason. There is a large body of research on the psychological experience and impact of terminating a pregnancy for fetal anomaly. However, there remains a lack of evidence on the holistic healthcare experience of parents in this situation. To develop a comprehensive understanding of the healthcare experiences and needs of parents, this systematic review sought to summarise and appraise the literature on parents' experiences following a termination of pregnancy for fetal anomaly.

REVIEW QUESTION

What are the healthcare experiences and needs of parents who undergo a termination of pregnancy following an antenatal diagnosis of a fetal anomaly?

METHODS

A systematic review was undertaken with searches completed across six multi-disciplinary electronic databases (Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Cochrane). Eligible articles were qualitative, quantitative or mixed methods studies, published between January 2010 and August 2021, reporting the results of primary data on the healthcare experiences or healthcare needs in relation to termination of pregnancy for fetal anomaly for either, or both parents. Findings were synthesised using Thematic Analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 30 articles were selected for inclusion in this review of which 24 were qualitative, five quantitative and one mixed-methods. Five overarching themes emerged from the synthesis of findings: (1) Contextual impact on access to and perception of care, (2) Organisation of care, (3) Information to inform decision making, (4) Compassionate care, and (5) Partner experience.

CONCLUSION

Compassionate healthcare professionals who provide non-judgemental and sensitive care can impact positively on parents' satisfaction with the care they receive. A well organised and co-ordinated healthcare system is needed to provide an effective and high-quality service.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO registration number: CRD42020175970 .

Surgical termination of pregnancy for fetal anomaly: what role can an independent abortion service provider play?

Most hospitals in Great Britain only offer a medical termination of pregnancy for a fetal anomaly (TOPFA) in the second trimester. We describe the safety and acceptability of a surgical TOPFA service delivered by an independent-sector abortion provider. Non-identifiable data for women undergoing TOPFA at British Pregnancy Advisory Service from 1 January 2015 to 31 March 2016 was extracted from existing databases. Anonymous feedback was obtained using a questionnaire. Women (n = 389) were treated along a specialised care pathway within routine abortion lists. The anomalies were chromosomal (64.0%), structural (30.8%), suspected chromosomal and/or structural or unknown (5.1%). The termination method was vacuum aspiration (41.9%) or dilation and evacuation (58.1%). No complications were reported. Feedback (173 women, 122 partners) indicated care was sensitive (99.6%), supportive (100.0%), knowledgeable (99.2%), and helpful (100.0%). Most (92.1%) reported the right amount of partner involvement. All of the respondents were likely/very likely to recommend the service. A cross-sector approach safely and satisfactorily increases the choice of TOPFA methods. Impact Statement What is already known on this subject? A surgical abortion in the first and second trimesters has been demonstrated to be safe and acceptable, if not preferable, to a medical induction for most women, including those seeking a termination of pregnancy for a foetal anomaly (TOPFA). However, most hospitals in Britain only offer a medical TOPFA in the second trimester, often due to a lack of skills to provide a surgical alternative. The lack of choice of method has a negative impact on women's experiences of TOPFA care. Independent sector abortion clinics provide the majority of surgical abortions in the second trimester in Britain, and are therefore a potential site of surgical TOPFA care. What do the results of this study add? Women and NHS service providers can be reassured that when a dedicated care pathway for TOPFA is employed in the context of routine abortion provision in the independent sector, the choice of termination method can be safely and satisfactorily increased. What are the implications of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? The main implication is the raising of awareness among NHS providers of the availability and acceptability of this model of TOFPA service delivery, so it can become an option for more women who do not want to have a medical induction. We hope that the demonstration of some women's preferences for surgical TOPFA and the safety of this option will lead to development of this service within routine abortion lists within hospital settings. Further research could include determining the reasons why women and their partners may ultimately not choose to pursue a surgical TOPFA within the independent sector abortion service and an in-depth exploration of women's experiences of being treated within this setting.

Women's Experiences and Preferences for Service Delivery of Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing for Aneuploidy in a Public Health Setting: A Mixed Methods Study

Non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) for aneuploidy is currently only available in the UK through the private sector outside of the research arena. As part of an implementation study in the UK National Health Service we conducted a mixed methods study to assess women’s experience of being offered NIPT using validated measures of decisional conflict, decisional regret and anxiety. Clinical service preferences were also explored. Women with a Down syndrome screening risk >1:1000 were invited to take part in the study and offered NIPT, NIPT and invasive testing (for women with a risk above 1:150) or no further testing. A cross-sectional survey and semi-structured interviews were conducted at two time points; at the time of testing and one month following receipt of results (or equivalent for NIPT decliners). In total, 845 questionnaires and 81 interviews were analysed. The main motivation to accept NIPT was for reassurance (30.8%). Decisional conflict occurred in a minimal number of cases (3.8%), however, none of the participants experienced decisional regret. Around a third (29.9%) of women had elevated anxiety at the time of testing, including intermediate risk women who traditionally would not be offered further testing (54.4% high risk; 20.1% medium risk), a finding supported through the qualitative interviews where prolonged or additional anxiety was found to occur in some medium risk cases. Women were overwhelmingly positive about the opportunity to have a test that was procedurally safe, accurate, reduced the need for invasive testing and identified cases of Down syndrome that might otherwise have been missed. Reassurance was identified as the main motivator for accepting NIPT, particularly amongst medium risk women, with high risk women inclined to accept NIPT to inform decisions around invasive testing. The current turnaround time for test result was identified as a key limitation. All the women interviewed thought NIPT should be adopted as part of NHS clinical practice, with the majority favouring NIPT offered as a first-line test. Our study highlights the potential that NIPT has to positively impact women’s experience of prenatal testing for aneuploidy.