"I Went Into This Field to Empower Other People, and I Feel Like I Failed": Residents Experience Moral Distress Post-Dobbs.

Background The 2022 Supreme Court ruling in Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization nullified the constitutional right to abortion, which led to effective bans in at least 14 US states and placed obstetrics and gynecology (OB/GYN) residents in dilemmas where they may have to withhold care, potentially causing moral distress-a health care workforce phenomenon less understood among resident physicians. Objective To identify and explore moral distress experienced by OB/GYN residents due to care restrictions post-Dobbs. Methods In 2023, we invited OB/GYN residents, identified by their program directors, training in states with restricted abortion access, to participate in one-on-one, semi-structured interviews via Zoom about their experiences caring for patients post-Dobbs. We used thematic analysis to analyze interview data. Results Twenty-one residents described their experiences of moral distress due to restrictions. We report on 3 themes in their accounts related to moral distress (and 4 subthemes): (1) challenges to their physician identity (inability to do the job, internalized distress, and reconsidering career choices); (2) participating in care that exacerbates inequities (and erodes patient trust); and (3) determination to advocate for and provide abortion care in the future. Conclusions OB/GYN residents grappled with moral distress and identified challenges from abortion restrictions.

Trainee Perspectives Regarding the Effect of the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization Supreme Court Decision on Obstetrics and Gynecology Training.

Objectives: We aimed to describe obstetrics and gynecology (OBGYN) trainees' anticipation of how the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization (Dobbs) U.S. Supreme Court decision may affect their training. Methods: A REDCap survey of OBGYN residents and fellows in the United States from September 19, 2022, to December 1, 2022, queried trainees' anticipated achievement of relevant Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) training milestones, their concerns about the ability to provide care and concern about legal repercussions during training, and the importance of OBGYN competence in managing certain clinical situations for residency graduates. The primary outcome was an ACGME program trainee feeling uncertain or unable to obtain the highest level queried for a relevant ACGME milestone, including experiencing 20 abortion procedures in residency. Results: We received 469 eligible responses; the primary outcome was endorsed by 157 respondents (33.5%). After correction for confounders, significant predictors of the primary outcome were state environment (aOR = 3.94 for pending abortion restrictions; aOR = 2.71 for current abortion restrictions), trainee type (aOR = 0.21 for fellow vs. resident), and a present or past Ryan Training Program in residency (aOR = 0.55). Although the vast majority of trainees believed managing relevant clinical situations are key to OBGYN competence, 10%-30% of trainees believed they would have to stop providing the standard of care in clinical situations during training. Conclusions: This survey of OBGYN trainees indicates higher uncertainty about achieving ACGME milestones and procedural competency in clinical situations potentially affected by the Dobbs decision in states with legal restrictions on abortion.

Abortion training in U.S. obstetrics and gynecology residency programs in a post-Dobbs era.

OBJECTIVES: The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education requires all obstetrics and gynecology residents have access to abortion training. The impact of Dobbs on training remains unknown. We aimed to describe residency programs affected by abortion bans and those lacking abortion training despite permissive state policies. We considered demographic data to understand the impacts on residents under-represented in medicine. STUDY DESIGN: We used residency databases and websites to abstract data. We identified programs offering routine abortion training as either those with Ryan Programs or those with website or email acknowledgment of training. We defined states with abortion bans as those with either complete or 6-week bans as of December 2022. We used χ2 and Student's t tests in descriptive analyses and performed a logistic regression to adjust for demographic and program-specific variables. RESULTS: Of 286 residency programs included, 140 (49%) offered routine abortion training prior to Dobbs. As of December 2022, 19 of these (14%) had lost the ability to provide routine in-state abortion training. Of 223 residency programs in states with legal abortion, 102 (46%) programs lacked routine abortion training. These sites were more likely to be community or community-university programs, with graduates more likely to practice as generalists. Resident race/ethnicity did not differ between residents in states with legal abortion vs abortion bans. CONCLUSIONS: Nearly half of obstetrics and gynecology residency programs in states with legal abortion do not appear to provide routine abortion training. Further work is needed to understand this paucity of training and maximize access in legislatively permissible environments. IMPLICATIONS: Following Dobbs, 14% of residency programs lost in-state abortion training. Notably, in states with legal abortion, 46% of programs lack routine abortion training despite permissive legislation. This presents a window of opportunity for expansion of abortion training, particularly at community and community-university hybrid residency sites.

The association between abortion training and obstetrics and gynecology resident competence and intention to provide abortion care before Dobbs.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the role of abortion training in fourth-year obstetrics and gynecology (OBGYN) residents' abortion care competence and practice intentions before the Dobbs decision. STUDY DESIGN: This is a planned secondary analysis of survey data of fourth-year U.S. OBGYN residents. Abortion training was defined as 'routine' if automatically included in schedules, ''optional'' if not scheduled but available, and ''not available''. Self-assessed competence was defined as feeling prepared to independently provide care. Participants were asked about their competence and post-residency intentions to provide specific aspects of pregnancy loss and induced abortion care. RESULTS: Of 1241 fourth-year residents, 885 (71%) completed the questions of interest. For each skill, more residents with routine training reported competence compared to those with less comprehensive training. More residents with routine training reported intentions to include abortion care in practice (422, 79%) compared to residents with optional (171, 66%) or no training (51, 55%), p < 0.001). Residents with routine training were nearly six times more likely to intend to provide medication abortion post-residency compared to residents without training; more residents in all groups reported intentions to provide care for pregnancy loss compared to abortion. CONCLUSIONS: Pre-Dobbs, residents with routine abortion training had greater self-assessed competence in abortion care than those with optional or no training and were more likely to intend to provide this after residency. Given the evolving impacts of the 2022 reversal of Roe v Wade, residency training programs must work to ensure routine access to legally permissible abortion training as routine training is associated with intention to provide fundamental, reproductive healthcare. IMPLICATIONS: Routine training in abortion care during OBGYN residency is associated with higher competence and intention to provide post-residency - availability of this training Is severely compromised in restricted states post-Dobbs.

Effects of the Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization Decision on Obstetrics and Gynecology Graduating Residents' Practice Plans.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the association of the Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization ( Dobbs ) decision on future practice locations of graduating obstetrics and gynecology residents. METHODS: This is a mixed-methods survey study of obstetrics and gynecology residents graduating from sites with Ryan Program abortion training programs (109 sites) between March 8, 2023, and April 25, 2023. We conducted both univariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses to identify factors that were associated with post- Dobbs change in career plans, particularly location. We also performed a thematic analysis using responses to the survey's optional, open-ended prompt, "Please describe how the Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization decision impacted your professional plans." RESULTS: Of an estimated 724 residents graduating from residencies with Ryan Program abortion training programs, 349 participated in the survey (48.2% response rate); 17.6% of residents indicated that the Dobbs decision changed the location of intended future practice or fellowship plans. Residents who before the Dobbs decision intended to practice in abortion-restrictive states were eight times more likely to change their practice plans than those who planned to practice in protected states before the Dobbs decision (odds ratio 8.52, 95% CI 3.81-21.0). In a thematic analysis of open-ended responses, 90 residents wrote responses related to "not living in a state with abortion restrictions." Of residents pursuing fellowship, 36 indicated that they did not rank or ranked lower programs in restrictive states. CONCLUSION: These findings demonstrate reduced desire of residents in obstetrics and gynecology to practice or pursue fellowship in restrictive states after residency. This reduction in obstetrics and gynecology workforce could significantly exacerbate maternity care deserts.

Projected Implications of Overturning Roe v Wade on Abortion Training in U.S. Obstetrics and Gynecology Residency Programs.

In June 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court is expected to issue a decision on Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization, a direct challenge to Roe v Wade. A detailed policy analysis by the Guttmacher Institute projects that, if Roe v Wade is overturned, 21 states are certain to ban abortion and five states are likely to ban abortion. The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education requires access to abortion training for all obstetrics and gynecology residency programs. We performed a comprehensive study of all accredited U.S. obstetrics and gynecology residency programs to assess how many of these programs and trainees are currently located in states projected to ban abortion if Roe v Wade is overturned. We found that, of 286 accredited obstetrics and gynecology residency programs with current residents, 128 (44.8%) are in states certain or likely to ban abortion if Roe v Wade is overturned. Therefore, of 6,007 current obstetrics and gynecology residents, 2,638 (43.9%) are certain or likely to lack access to in-state abortion training. Preparation for the reversal of Roe v Wade should include not only a recognition of the negative effects on patient access to abortion care in affected states, but also of the dramatic implications for obstetrics and gynecology residency training.

Professionalism in Family Planning Care Workshop.

INTRODUCTION: When clinicians feel negative emotions toward patients, providinge patient-centered care can be difficult. This can occur in family planning scenarios, such as when a provider is uncomfortable with a patient choosing abortion. The Professionalism in Family Planning Care Workshop (PFPCW), framed around professionalism values, used guided reflection to foster self-awareness and empathy in order to teach future providers to provide patient-centered care. METHODS: In the PFPCW, learners discussed challenging patient interactions and family planning scenarios to develop self-awareness and identify strategies for maintaining therapeutic relationships with patients when they experience negative feelings toward them. We implemented the workshop across the United States and Canada and collected pre- and postsurvey data to evaluate program outcomes at Kirkpatrick evaluation levels of participant reaction and effects on learners' attitudes. RESULTS: A total of 403 participants participated in 27 workshops in which pre- and postworkshop surveys (70% and 46% response rates, respectively) were administered. Sixty-five percent of the participants were residents, and 36% had previously participated in a similar workshop. The majority (92%) rated the PFPCWs as worthwhile. Participants valued the discussion and self-reflection components. Afterward, 23% reported that their attitudes toward caring for people with unintended pregnancy changed to feeling more comfortable. Participants said they would employ self-reflection and empathy in future challenging interactions. DISCUSSION: In this pilot implementation study, our workshop provided learners with strategies for patient-centered care in challenging family planning patient interactions. We are currently modifying the workshop and evaluation program based on feedback.

Residents' Experiences of Negative Emotions toward Patients: Challenges to their Identities.

PhenomenonMedical learners are more likely than practicing physicians to experience negative emotions toward some patients whom they find challenging, and medical students experience such emotions related to their identity as learners. Little is known about experiences of residents, who are further along in their physician identity formation and have greater autonomy and competence. We explored and characterized how residents understand their experiences of the phenomenon of feeling negative emotions toward patients in relation to their identities as residents. Approach: In 2018, 305 final-year obstetrics and gynecology residents were invited to participate in interviews, which we conducted until reaching theoretical sufficiency. In semi-structured interviews conducted by phone, we probed interactions when residents felt negative emotions toward patients, including reasons for their feelings related to their professional identities, strategies, and curricular desires. The authors coded data and identified patterns using thematic analysis. Findings: Nineteen residents were interviewed by phone. Residents experienced negative emotions toward patients because of challenges to their identities as: physicians - wanting respect and specific unexpected patient behaviors; learners - desiring complete autonomy and experiencing challenges with attending physicians; teachers - wanting to be a role model and protect junior learners; and workers - trying to complete tasks. Among the strategies used to manage feelings toward patients, they struggled with "venting", or complaining about patients, which was not always helpful and residents recognized as perceived negatively by students. They desired curricular support for these interactions such as debriefs and other supported reflection, faculty modeling, and communication skills training. Insights: Like medical students and physicians in practice, residents experience negative emotions toward patients, often because of and made more difficult by their identities as physicians, learners, teachers, and workers. Educators should support residents' reflections about these interactions, model compassionate behavior when feeling challenged by patients, and address unhealthy coping strategies.

Twenty Years of the Ryan Residency Training Program in Abortion and Family Planning.

OBJECTIVE: To summarize the effects of routine, opt-out abortion and family planning residency training on obstetrics and gynecology (ob-gyn) residents' clinical skills in uterine evacuation and intentions to provide abortion care after residency. METHODS: Data from ob-gyn residency programs supported during the first 20 years of the Kenneth J. Ryan Residency Training Program in Abortion and Family Planning were analyzed. Postrotation surveys assessed residents' training experiences and acquisition of abortion care skills. Residency program director surveys assessed benefits of the training to residents and the academic department from the educators' perspectives. RESULTS: A total of 2775 residents in 89 ob-gyn programs completed postrotation surveys for a response rate of 72%. During the rotation, residents - including those who only partially participated - gained exposure to and skills in first- and second-trimester abortion care. Sixty-one percent intended to provide abortion care in their postresidency practice. More than 90% of residency program directors (97.5% response rate) reported that training improved resident competence in abortion and contraception care and 81.3% reported that the training increased their own program's appeal to residency applicants. CONCLUSION: Over 20 years, the Ryan Program has supported programs to integrate abortion training to give ob-gyn residents the skills and inspiration to provide comprehensive reproductive health care, including uterine evacuation and abortion care, in future practice. Residency program directors noted that this integrated training meets resident applicants' expectations. IMPLICATIONS: Ryan Program residents are trained to competence and are prepared, both clinically and in their professional attitudes, to care for women's reproductive health.

Racial diversity in abortion education and intention to provide abortion in postresidency practice: data from the Ryan Program.

BACKGROUND: In 2011, 38% of US reproductive-aged women lived in the 89% of counties with no abortion provider. Physicians from racial and ethnic minority backgrounds (black, Latino, Native American, and Asian American) are more likely than white physicians to practice in underserved areas and serve patients who are poor or minorities. Abortion patients are racially diverse. However, we know little about racial and ethnic makeup of abortion providers and the differences in physicians' interest in providing abortions. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to examine racial differences in participation in abortion training and intention to provide abortion in postresidency practice. STUDY DESIGN: This is a cross-sectional study of Ryan Program residents after completing a family-planning rotation. The Ryan Program supports obstetrics-gynecology residency programs to incorporate routine abortion care into training. Since 2003 the Ryan Residency Program has administered postrotation resident surveys, and race/ethnicity was added in 2015. We assessed correlates of intention to provide abortion, specifically comparing minorities with whites and whether training participation varied by race. We conducted a modified mediation analysis to assess the role of potential mediators in the relationship between race and intention to provide abortion. RESULTS: A total of 777 residents (79.0%) responded from September 2015 through August 2018. The proportions were as follows: 64.9% white, 8.5% black, 4.1% Hispanic/Latino, 18.8% Asian, and 3.8% as other. Overall, 56.9% intended to provide abortion for all indications and 82.4% for pregnancy complications. In a univariate analysis, Asian residents were significantly more likely to intend to provide abortions for all indications compared with white residents (68.4% vs 56.0%, odds ratio, 1.69, confidence interval, 1.13-2.53). This difference was not significant when controlling for religiosity and abortion attitudes. Religiosity (odds ratio, 0.60, confidence interval, 0.47-0.77) and abortion attitude (odds ratio, 3.32, confidence interval, 2.48-4.44) were significantly correlated with intention to provide abortion for nonmedical indications after residency. In a modified mediation analysis, the relationship between race and intention to provide was mediated by religiosity for black residents and abortion attitude for Asian residents. There was no difference in participation in abortion training by race/ethnicity. CONCLUSION: Racial differences in intention to provide abortion in postresidency practice are mediated by religiosity and abortion attitude. Better understanding the intricate relationships between race, religiosity, participation in training, and future practice will allow us to improve abortion training while paving the way to support a more diverse abortion provider workforce.

Sources of support for and resistance to abortion training in obstetrics and gynecology residency programs.

BACKGROUND: Only 64% of obstetrics and gynecology program directors report routine, scheduled training in abortion, despite the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education's requirements for routine training. Most report that exposure to training is limited to specific clinical circumstances. OBJECTIVE: We sought to describe residency program directors' perspectives of support for and resistance to abortion training in residency training programs in the United States. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A national survey of directors explored the availability of abortion training as well as support for and resistance to abortion training within their departments and institutions. In addition, directors who indicated that training was not available at all, available only as an elective, or as routine but limited to specific clinical circumstances, were also asked which procedures were limited, in what ways, and by whom. Descriptive and bivariate analyses were performed. RESULTS: A total of 190 residency program directors (79%) responded from throughout the United States (30% in the Northeast, 30% in the South, 23% in the Midwest, and 16% in the West), and 14% described their program as religiously affiliated. Most directors (73%) reported at least some institutional or government restrictions to training, and reported an average of 3 types of restrictions. Hospital policy was the most commonly reported restriction, followed by state law. Programs with routine abortion training reported an average of 2 restrictions, compared with 4 restrictions in programs with optional training, and 5 restrictions in programs with no abortion training. CONCLUSION: Significant barriers to integrating abortion training into residents' schedules continue to exist decades after the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education training mandate. We should use these data to develop better support and targeted strategies for increasing the number of trained abortion providers in the United States.

Abortion training in US obstetrics and gynecology residency programs.

BACKGROUND: Nearly 15 years ago, 51% of US obstetrics and gynecology residency training program directors reported that abortion training was routine, 39% reported training was optional, and 10% did not have training. The status of abortion training now is unknown. OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine the current status of abortion training in obstetrics and gynecology residency programs. STUDY DESIGN: Through surveying program directors of US obstetrics and gynecology residency training programs, we conducted a cross-sectional study on the availability and characteristics of abortion training. Training was defined as routine if included in residents' schedules with individuals permitted to opt out, optional as not in the residents' schedules but available for individuals to arrange, and not available. Findings were compared between types of programs using bivariate analyses. RESULTS: In all, 190 residency program directors (79%) responded. A total of 64% reported routine training with dedicated time, 31% optional, and 5% not available. Routine, scheduled training was correlated with higher median numbers of uterine evacuation procedures. While the majority believed their graduates to be competent in first-trimester aspiration (71%), medication abortion (66%), and induction termination (67%), only 22% thought graduates were competent in dilation and evacuation. Abortion procedures varied by clinical indication, with some programs limiting cases to pregnancy complication, fetal anomaly, or demise. CONCLUSION: Abortion training in obstetrics and gynecology residency training programs has increased since 2004, yet many programs graduate residents without sufficient training to provide abortions for any indication, as well as dilation and evacuation. Professional training standards and support for family planning training have coincided with improved training, but there are still barriers to understand and overcome.

Exploring How Residents Who Partially Participate in Family Planning Training Determine Their Level of Participation.

OBJECTIVES: The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) requires that obstetrics and gynecology residency programs provide access to abortion training, though residents may elect to opt out of participating due to religious or moral objections. While clinical benefits of partial participation have previously been explored, our study aimed to explore how residents navigate partial participation in abortion training and determine their limits. STUDY DESIGN: This study was qualitative in nature. Between June 2010 and June 2011, we conducted 26 semi-structured phone interviews with residents who opted out of some or all of the family planning rotation at 19 programs affiliated with The Ryan Residency Training Program. Faculty directors identified eligible residents, or residents self-reported in routine program evaluation. We analyzed data using the conventional content analysis method. RESULTS: We interviewed all 26 (46%) of 56 eligible residents willing to be interviewed. Three main categories constituted the general concepts concerning resident decision-making in training participation: (1) variation in timing of when residents determined the extent of participation, (2) a diversity of influences on the residents' level of participation, and (3) the perception of support or pressure related to their participation decision. CONCLUSIONS: The findings indicated that residents who partially participate in abortion training at programs with specialized opt-out family planning training weigh many factors when deciding under what circumstances, if any, they will provide abortions and participate in training.

Impact of partial participation in integrated family planning training on medical knowledge, patient communication and professionalism.

INTRODUCTION: Obstetrics and gynecology residency programs are required to provide access to abortion training, but residents can opt out of participating for religious or moral reasons. Quantitative data suggest that most residents who opt out of doing abortions participate and gain skills in other aspects of the family planning training. However, little is known about their experience and perspective. METHODS: Between June 2010 and June 2011, we conducted semistructured interviews with current and former residents who opted out of some or all of the family planning training at ob-gyn residency programs affiliated with the Kenneth J. Ryan Residency Training Program in Abortion and Family Planning. Residents were either self-identified or were identified by their Ryan Program directors as having opted out of some training. The interviews were transcribed and coded using modified grounded theory. RESULTS: Twenty-six physicians were interviewed by telephone. Interviewees were from geographically diverse programs (35% Midwest, 31% West, 19% South/Southeast and 15% North/Northeast). We identified four dominant themes about their experience: (a) skills valued in the family planning training, (b) improved patient-centered care, (c) changes in attitudes about abortion and (d) miscommunication as a source of negative feelings. DISCUSSION: Respondents valued the ability to partially participate in the family planning training and identified specific aspects of their training which will impact future patient care. Many of the effects described in the interviews address core competencies in medical knowledge, patient care, communication and professionalism. We recommend that programs offer a spectrum of partial participation in family planning training to all residents, including residents who choose to opt out of doing some or all abortions. IMPLICATIONS: Learners who morally object to abortion but participate in training in family planning and abortion, up to their level of comfort, gain clinical and professional skills. We recommend that trainers should offer a range of participation levels to maximize the educational opportunities for these learners.

Dilation and evacuation training in maternal-fetal medicine fellowships.

OBJECTIVE: Many maternal-fetal medicine (MFM) specialists provide dilation and evacuation (D&E) procedures for their patients with fetal or obstetric complications. Our study describes the D&E training opportunities that are available to MFM trainees during their fellowship. STUDY DESIGN: National surveys of MFM fellows and fellowship program directors assessed the availability of D&E training in fellowship. Univariate and multivariate comparisons of correlates of D&E training and provision were performed. RESULTS: Of the 270 MFM fellows and 79 fellowship directors who were contacted, 92 (34%) and 44 (56%) responded, respectively. More than one-half of fellows (60/92) and almost one-half of fellowship programs (20/44) report organized training opportunities for D&E. Three-quarters of fellows who were surveyed believe that D&E training should be part of MFM fellowship, and one-third of fellows who have not yet been trained would like training opportunities. Being at a fellowship that offers D&E training is associated with 7.5 times higher odds of intending to provide D&E after graduation (P = .005; 95% confidence interval, 1.8-30). CONCLUSION: MFM physicians are in a unique position to provide termination services for their patients with pregnancy complications. Many MFM subspecialists provide D&E services during fellowship and plan to continue after graduation. MFM fellows express a strong interest in D&E training; therefore, D&E training opportunities should be offered as a part of MFM fellowship.

Availability and characteristics of abortion training in US ob-gyn residency programs: a national survey.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the availability and characteristics of abortion training in US ob-gyn residency programs. METHODS: We surveyed fourth-year residents at US residency programs by email regarding availability and type of abortion training, procedural experience and self-assessed competence in abortion skills. We conducted multivariable, ordinal logistic regression with general estimating equations to determine individual-level and resident-reported, program-level correlates of quantity of uterine evacuation procedures done during residency. RESULTS: Three hundred sixty-two residents provided data, representing 161 of the 240 residency programs contacted. Access to training in elective abortion was available to most respondents: 54% reported routine training--where abortion training was routinely scheduled; 30% reported opt-in training--where training was available but not routinely integrated; and 16% reported that elective abortion training was not available. Residents in programs with routine elective abortion training and those who intended to do abortions before residency did a greater number of first-trimester manual uterine aspiration and second-trimester dilation and evacuation procedures than those without routine training. Similarly, routine, integrated training, even for indications other than elective abortion, correlated with more clinical experience (all p<.01, odds ratio and confidence interval shown below). CONCLUSION: There is a strong independent relationship between routine training and greater clinical experience with uterine aspiration procedures.