RESUMO
Objectives: Although access to abortion is a national priority in France, there is little documented evidence that it is actually respected. In the Grand Est region, the 20212023 plan for access to abortion includes a review of family planning practices and health care provision, to update the 2019 report. It raises the question of access to abortion in all its dimensions, and aims to implement improvement actions best suited to the region's problems. Method: An online questionnaire was sent to hospitals, local perinatal centers, sexual health centers, and independent professionals with presumed family planning activity. Of those who responded, only those with actual family planning activity were included. Results: The five-day deadline for the first appointment recommended by the HAS can be met by 73% of those surveyed. During pre- or post-abortion consultations, a psychosocial interview is offered to 92% of patients, and the detection of violence to 97%. Although 14 hospitals (38%) have extended their abortion access time to 16 weeks of amenorrhea, the number of facilities handling abortions beyond 13 weeks of amenorrhea has fallen since 2019. In primary care, 70% of private practitioners and 61% of sexual health centers offer abortions up to 9 weeks of amenorrhea. Conclusions: Access to abortion has weakened in the Grand Est region between 2019 and 2023. New laws and regulations could be a lever for improvement, provided that the professionals involved are given the means.
Objectifs: Si l'accès à l'IVG est une priorité nationale en France, son respect effectif n'est que peu documenté. Dans le Grand Est, le plan d'accès à l'IVG 2021-2023 inclut la réalisation d'un état des lieux des pratiques et de l'offre de soins en orthogénie, pour actualiser celui de 2019. Il pose la question de l'accès à l'IVG dans toutes ses dimensions et vise la mise en place des actions d'amélioration les plus adaptées aux problématiques de la région. Méthodes: Un questionnaire en ligne a été envoyé aux centres hospitaliers, aux centres périnataux de proximité, aux centres de santé sexuelle et aux professionnels libéraux ayant une activité d'orthogénie supposée. Parmi ceux qui y ont répondu, seuls ceux qui avaient une activité d'orthogénie effective ont été inclus. Résultats: Le délai de premier rendez-vous de cinq jours recommandés par l'HAS peut être respecté par 73 % des enquêtés. Lors des consultations pré- ou post-IVG, un entretien psychosocial est proposé à 92 % et un repérage des violences à 97 %. Bien que 14 centres hospitaliers (38 %) aient allongé leur délai d'accès à l'IVG jusqu'à 16 SA, le nombre d'établissements prenant en charge les IVG au-delà de 13 semaines d'aménorrhée a baissé depuis 2019. En médecine de ville, 70 % des professionnels libéraux et 61 % des CSS ont une offre IVG allant jusqu'à 9 SA. Conclusions: L'accès à l'IVG s'est fragilisé dans le Grand Est entre 2019 et 2023. Les nouvelles lois et réglementations pourraient être un levier d'amélioration à condition que des moyens soient donnés aux professionnels impliqués.
Assuntos
Aborto Induzido , Serviços de Planejamento Familiar , Acessibilidade aos Serviços de Saúde , Feminino , Humanos , Gravidez , Aborto Induzido/legislação & jurisprudência , Aborto Induzido/métodos , Amenorreia , Hospitais , Inquéritos e Questionários , França , Acessibilidade aos Serviços de Saúde/legislação & jurisprudênciaRESUMO
AIM: This study aimed to evaluate the implementation of France's neonatal hearing loss screening programme years after its launch, and to estimate permanent bilateral neonatal hearing loss (PBNHL) prevalence and distribution by severity. METHODS: This descriptive study used aggregated regional data on all births in France in 2015-2016. Screening coverage, refusal rate, positive predictive value (PPV), proportion of children with suspected PBNHL, PBNHL prevalence and distribution by severity were calculated. RESULTS: Eight hundred thousand neonates were eligible for the screening programme per year. Between 2015 and 2016, screening coverage increased (83.3% vs. 93.8%; p < 0.001), and the refusal rate remained stable (0.1%). In 2016, when considering the additional tests performed several weeks after birth, the proportion of suspected PBNHL neonates decreased (1.4% vs. 0.9%) while the PPV increased (4.7% vs. 7.6%). In 2015, the estimated prevalence of PBNHL (moderate to profound) was 0.09% (95% CI 0.08-0.10). Among neonates with >= 41 decibels deficit, 56.8%, 16.6%, and 26.6% had moderate, severe and profound hearing loss, respectively. CONCLUSION: The national target of 90% screening coverage was exceeded. The additional test could be useful to avoid overcrowding in diagnostic structures. Diagnostic data quality must be improved to confirm PBNHL prevalence and distribution by severity.