Landscape assessment of the availability of medical abortion medicines in India.

BACKGROUND: Medical abortion with mifepristone and misoprostol can be provided up to 63 days' gestation in India. This accounts for 67.5 percent of all abortions in the country. We conducted an assessment to determine the availability of medical abortion medicines, specifically the combi-pack, in India. METHODS: We applied the World Health Organization landscape assessment protocol at the national level. The assessment protocol included a five-step adaptation of an existing availability framework, including online data collection, desk review, country-level key informant interviews, and an analysis to identify barriers and opportunities to improve medical abortion availability. The assessment was conducted between August and March 2021. RESULTS: Medicines for medical abortion are included in the national essential drug list and available with prescription in India. The assessment identified 42 combi-pack products developed by 35 manufacturers. The quality of medical abortion medicines is regulated by national authorities; but as health is devolved to states, there are significant inter-state variations. This is seen across financing, procurement, manufacturing, and monitoring mechanisms for quality assurance of medical abortion medicines prior to distribution. There is a need to strengthen supply chain systems, ensure consistent availability of trained providers and build community awareness on use of medical abortion medicines for early abortions, at the time of the assessment. CONCLUSION: Opportunities to improve availability and quality of medical abortion medicines exist. For example, uniform implementation of regulatory standards, greater emphasis on quality-assurance during manufacturing, and standardizing of procurement and supply chain systems across states. Regular in-service training of providers on medical abortion is required. Finally, innovations in evidence dissemination and community engagement about the recently amended abortion law are needed.

Medical abortion is popular in India and benefits from a liberal legal context. It is important to understand the availability of quality abortion medicines in the country. Using the World Health Organization country assessment protocol and availability framework for medical abortion medicines we examined the availability of these medicines from supply to demand. We used this information to identify opportunities for increasing availability of quality-assured medical abortion medicines. We found that the context for medical abortion varies across states. Strengthening procurement and supply chain management, with a greater emphasis on quality-assurance and regulation of manufacturing should be instituted at the state-level. Training is also needed to increase provider knowledge of the latest national guidelines and laws to ensure respectful and person-centered services. Finally, the public should be informed about medical abortion as a safe and effective choice, especially for early abortions.

Strengthening regional commitment to ensuring access to medical abortion medicines in WHO's South-East Asia region: report of a participatory assessment and workshop.

BACKGROUND: In 2019, the World Health Organization identified improving access to safe abortion as an important priority toward improving sexual and reproductive health and rights and achieving Sustainable Development Goals. One strategy for addressing this priority is strengthening access to medicines for medical abortion. All 11 countries in the South-East Asia Region have some indications for legal abortion and permit post-abortion care. Therefore, strengthening access to medical abortion medicines is a reasonable strategy for improving access to safe abortion for the Region. METHODOLOGY: We applied an adapted version of an existing World Health Organization landscape assessment protocol for the availability of medical abortion medicines at the country-level in the South-East Asia Region. We collected publicly available data on the existence of national health laws, policies, and standard treatment guidelines; inclusion of medical abortion medicines in the national essential medicines list; and marketing authorization status for medical abortion medicines for each country and verified by Ministries of health. The findings were once more presented, discussed and recommendations were formulated during regional technical consultation workshop. Each country teams participated in the process, and subsequently, the suggestions were validated by representatives from Ministries of Health.. RESULTS: Few countries in the Region currently have national policies and guidelines for comprehensive safe abortion. However, either mifepristone-misoprostol in combination or misoprostol alone (for other indications) is included in national essential medicines lists in all countries except Indonesia and Sri Lanka. Few countries earmark specific public funds for procuring and distributing medical abortion commodities. In countries where abortion is legal, the private sector and NGOs support access to medical abortion information and medicines. Several countries only allow registered medical practitioners or specialists to administer medical abortion. CONCLUSION: Following this rapid participatory assessment and technical consultation workshop, the World Health Organization South-East Asia Regional Technical Advisory and Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights technical committee recommended priority actions for policy and advocacy, service delivery, and monitoring and evaluation, and indicated areas for support.

In-country availability of medical abortion medicines: a description of the framework and methodology of the WHO landscape assessments.

BACKGROUND: Availability of quality-assured medical abortion medicines plays a crucial role in providing comprehensive abortion care. However, access to these medicines is still restricted for many abortion seekers. Increasing availability of affordable, quality-assured mifepristone and misoprostol is important to improve access to safe medical abortion services. Driven by the outcomes of a global consultation hosted by the World Health Organization and the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency in 2018, we decided to holistically examine access to medical abortion medicines from supply to demand. The overarching principle of the national landscape assessments was to generate evidence to support policy dialog and policymaking that is contextual to the needs of the country. This paper aims to describe the framework and methodological approach used in the World Health Organization landscape assessments of medical abortion medicines at country-level. METHODS: A country assessment protocol was developed to guide the methodology of the World Health Organization landscape assessments. The assessment protocol included adaptation of an existing availability framework, an online desk review and literature review for existing data available for the country of interest, country-level key informant interviews, and analysis of the data to identify barriers and opportunities to improve medical abortion availability. CONCLUSION: The availability framework and methodology will allow the identification of key barriers that limit readiness of medical abortion medicines, and the development of opportunities to overcome those barriers. The national landscape assessments will provide directions for future investments and offer guidance for policy and programming on medical abortion care.

Increasing availability of affordable, safe, and effective medical abortion medicines is necessary to improve access to safe medical abortion services. Driven by the results of a meeting hosted by the World Health Organization and the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency in 2018, we decided to examine access to medical abortion medicines from supply to demand in selected countries. The overarching goal of the national landscape assessments was to generate evidence to support advocacy efforts and policymaking that is appropriate to the needs of the country. This paper aims to describe the assessment protocol and the steps taken in the World Health Organization landscape assessments of medical abortion medicines at country-level. The assessment allows for a determination of the enabling environment surrounding the provision of medical abortion services. This in turn allows for the identification of key barriers that limit availability of abortion medicines, and the identification of opportunities to overcome those barriers. The availability framework includes both supply and demand sides of commodity availability, considering factors from product introduction to use. This approach can be used for future national assessments for any health commodity or service. The assessment findings will be informative to policymakers and programme managers in developing plans to safeguard availability of safe and effective medical abortion medicines.

Availability of medical abortion medicines in eight countries: a descriptive analysis of key findings and opportunities.

BACKGROUND: In recent years a growing number of manufacturers and medical abortion products have entered country markets and health systems, with varying degrees of quality and accessibility. An interplay of factors including pharmaceutical regulations, abortion laws, government policies and service delivery guidelines and provider's knowledge and practices influence the availability of medical abortion medicines. We assessed the availability of medical abortion in eight countries to increase understanding among policymakers of the need to improve availability and affordability of quality-assured medical abortion products at regional and national levels. METHODS: Using a national assessment protocol and an availability framework, we assessed the availability of medical abortion medicines in Bangladesh, Liberia, Malawi, Nepal, Nigeria, Rwanda, Sierra Leone and South Africa between September 2019 and January 2020. RESULTS: Registration of abortion medicines-misoprostol or a combination of mifepristone and misoprostol-was established in all countries assessed, except Rwanda. Mifepristone and misoprostol regimen for medical abortion was identified on the national essential medicines list/standard treatment guidelines for South Africa as well as in specific abortion care service and delivery guidelines for Bangladesh, Nepal, Nigeria, and Rwanda. In Liberia, Malawi, and Sierra Leone-countries with highly restrictive abortion laws and no abortion service delivery guidelines or training curricula-no government-supported training on medical abortion for public sector providers had occurred. Instead, training on medical abortion was either limited in scope to select private sector providers and pharmacists or prohibited. Community awareness activities on medical abortion have been limited in scope across the countries assessed and where abortion is broadly legal, most women do not know that it is an option. CONCLUSION: Understanding the factors that influence the availability of medical abortion medicines is important to support policymakers improve availability of these medicines. The landscape assessments documented that medical abortion commodities can be uniquely impacted by the laws, policies, values, and degree of restrictions placed on service delivery programs. Results of the assessments can guide actions to improve access.

Unsafe abortion is a leading cause of death and disability among women of reproductive age. Medical management of abortion with mifepristone and misoprostol pills, or just misoprostol, is a safe and effective way to end a pregnancy. Owing to an increase in the number of medical abortion products that have entered country health systems, we examined access to these medicines from supply to demand in selected countries. The overarching goal of the national landscape assessments was to produce evidence to support advocacy efforts and policymaking for improved access to quality medical abortion products that is appropriate to the needs of the country. This paper aims to describe key findings across eight country settings on the availability of medical abortion medicines and identify key opportunities to improve access to them across countries.

Describing the safety of abortion at the population level using network-based survey approaches.

BACKGROUND: Despite the negative impact of unsafe abortions on women's health and rights, the degree of abortion safety remains strikingly undocumented for a large share of abortions globally. Data on how women induce abortions (method, setting, provider) are central to the measurement of abortion safety. However, health-facility statistics and direct questioning in population surveys do not yield representative data on abortion care seeking pathways in settings where access to abortion services is highly restricted. Recent developments in survey methodologies to study stigmatized / illegal behaviour and hidden populations rely on the fact that such information circulates within social networks; however, such efforts have yet to give convincing results for unsafe abortions. OBJECTIVE: This article presents the protocol of a study whose purpose is to apply and develop further two network-based methods to contribute to the generation of reliable population-level information on the safety of abortions in contexts where access to legal abortion services is highly restricted. METHODS: This study plans to obtain population-level data on abortion care seeking in two Health and Demographic Surveillance Systems in urban Kenya and rural Burkina Faso by applying two methods: Anonymous Third-Party Reporting (ATPR) (also known as confidantes' method) and Respondent Driven Sampling (RDS). We will conduct a mixed methods formative study to determine whether these network-based approaches are pertinent in the study contexts. The ATPR will be refined notably by incorporating elements of the Network Scale-Up Method (NSUM) to correct or account for certain of its biases (transmission, barrier, social desirability, selection). The RDS will provide reliable alternative estimates of abortion safety if large samples and equilibrium can be reached; an RDS multiplex variant (also including social referents) will be tested. DISCUSSION: This study aims at documenting abortion safety in two local sites using ATPR and RDS. If successful, it will provide data on the safety profiles of abortion seekers across sociodemographic categories in two contrasted settings in sub-Saharan Africa. It will advance the formative research needed to determine whether ATPR and RDS are applicable or not in a given context. It will improve the questionnaire and correcting factors for the ATPR, improve the capacity of RDS to produce quasi-representative data on abortion safety, and advance the validation of both methods.

Representative data on how women induce abortions and their consequences are central to measurements of abortion safety. However, due to the stigmatized nature of abortion, measuring the details of the process is challenging when the latter occur out of the realm of the law and do not result in complications registered in hospital statistics. Hence, there is sparse empirical population-level data on how women terminate their pregnancies in countries where access to abortion services is highly restricted, as well as little data on the side effects and complications associated with the methods they chose and health seeking for these complications. Recent developments in indirect survey methodologies to study stigmatized/illegal behaviour and hidden populations are likely to improve the quality of data collected on abortion safety in restrictive contexts: all are based on the sharing of information on stigmatized practices in social networks. We propose to refine and pilot two such network-based methods to validate their use for collecting (quasi) representative data on abortion safety in large population health surveys. These two approaches are: (i) a modified Anonymous Third-Party Reporting method (ATPR) integrating elements of the Network-Scale-up Method (NSUM) and (ii) Respondent-Driven Sampling (RDS). We will conduct this study in two African Health and Demographic Surveillance Systems (HDSS) sites, one urban (Nairobi, Kenya), and one comprising a town and adjacent villages (Kaya, Burkina Faso).

Disclosure to social network members among abortion-seeking women in low- and middle-income countries with restrictive access: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Health care for stigmatized reproductive practices in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) often remains illegal; when legal, it is often inadequate, difficult to find and / or stigmatizing, which results in women deferring care or turning to informal information sources and providers. Women seeking an induced abortion in LMICs often face obstacles of this kind, leading to unsafe abortions. A growing number of studies have shown that abortion seekers confide in social network members when searching for formal or informal care. However, results have been inconsistent; in some LMICs with restricted access to abortion services (restrictive LMICs), disclosure appears to be limited. MAIN BODY: This systematic review aims to identify the degree of disclosure to social networks members in restrictive LMICs, and to explore the differences between women obtaining an informal medical abortion and other abortion seekers. This knowledge is potentially useful for designing interventions to improve information on safe abortion or for developing network-based data collection strategies. We searched Pubmed, POPLINE, AIMS, LILACS, IMSEAR, and WPRIM databases for peer-reviewed articles, published in any language from 2000 to 2018, concerning abortion information seeking, communication, networking and access to services in LMICs with restricted access to abortion services. We categorized settings into four types by possibility of anonymous access to abortion services and local abortion stigma: (1) anonymous access possible, hyper stigma (2) anonymous access possible, high stigma (3) non-anonymous access, high stigma (4) non-anonymous access, hyper stigma. We screened 4101 references, yielding 79 articles with data from 33 countries for data extraction. We found a few countries (or groups within countries) exemplifying the first and second types of setting, while most studies corresponded to the third type. The share of abortion seekers disclosing to network members increased across setting types, with no women disclosing to network members beyond their intimate circle in Type 1 sites, a minority in Type 2 and a majority in Type 3. The informal use of medical abortion did not consistently modify disclosure to others. CONCLUSION: Abortion-seeking women exhibit widely different levels of disclosure to their larger social network members across settings/social groups in restrictive LMICs depending on the availability of anonymous access to abortion information and services, and the level of stigma.

Women seeking an induced abortion in LMICs often face inexistent or inadequate, difficult to find and/ or stigmatizing legal services, leading to the use of informal methods and providers, and unsafe abortions. A growing number of studies have shown that abortion seekers contact social network members beyond their intimate circle when seeking care. However, results have been inconsistent. We searched Pubmed, POPLINE, AIMS, LILACS, IMSEAR, and WPRIM databases for peer-reviewed articles published in any language from 2000 to 2018, concerning abortion information seeking, communication, networking and access to services in restrictive LMICs. We screened 4101 references, yielding 79 articles with data from 33 countries for extraction. We grouped countries (or social groups within countries) into four types of settings: (1) anonymous access possible, hyper stigma; (2) anonymous access possible, high stigma; (3) non-anonymous access, high stigma; (4) non-anonymous access, hyper stigma. Most studies fitted Type 3. Disclosing to network members increased across setting types: no women confided in network members in Type 1 settings, a minority in Type 2 and a majority in Type 3. No setting fitted Type 4. The informal use of medical abortion did not modify disclosure to others. Abortion seekers in restrictive LMICs frequently contact their social network in some settings/groups but less frequently in others, depending on the availability of anonymous access to abortion care and the level of stigma. This knowledge is useful for designing interventions to improve information on safe abortion and for developing network-based data collection strategies.

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.

Pregnancies, abortions, and pregnancy intentions: a protocol for modeling and reporting global, regional and country estimates.

BACKGROUND: Estimates of pregnancies, abortions and pregnancy intentions can help assess how effectively women and couples are able to fulfil their childbearing aspirations. Abortion incidence estimates are also a necessary foundation for research on the safety of abortions performed and the consequences of unsafe abortion. Furthermore, periodic estimates of these indicators are needed to help inform policy and programmes. METHODS: We will develop a Bayesian hierarchical times series model which estimates levels and trends in pregnancy rates, abortion rates, and percentages of pregnancies and births unintended for each five-year period between 1990 and 2019. The model will be informed by data on abortion incidence and the percentage of births or pregnancies that were unintended. We will develop a data classification process to be applied to all available data. Model-based estimates and associated uncertainty will take account of data sparsity and quality. Our proposed approach will advance previous work in two key ways. First, we will estimate pregnancy and abortion rates simultaneously, and model the propensity to abort an unintended pregnancy, as opposed to modeling abortion rates directly as in prior work. Secondly, we will produce estimates that are reproducible at the country level by publishing the data inputs, data classification processes and source code. DISCUSSION: This protocol will form the basis for updated global, regional and national estimates of intended and unintended pregnancy rates, abortion rates, and the percent of unintended pregnancies ending in abortion, from 1990 to 2019.

Global, regional, and subregional classification of abortions by safety, 2010-14: estimates from a Bayesian hierarchical model.

BACKGROUND: Global estimates of unsafe abortions have been produced for 1995, 2003, and 2008. However, reconceptualisation of the framework and methods for estimating abortion safety is needed owing to the increased availability of simple methods for safe abortion (eg, medical abortion), the increasingly widespread use of misoprostol outside formal health systems in contexts where abortion is legally restricted, and the need to account for the multiple factors that affect abortion safety. METHODS: We used all available empirical data on abortion methods, providers, and settings, and factors affecting safety as covariates within a Bayesian hierarchical model to estimate the global, regional, and subregional distributions of abortion by safety categories. We used a three-tiered categorisation based on the WHO definition of unsafe abortion and WHO guidelines on safe abortion to categorise abortions as safe or unsafe and to further divide unsafe abortions into two categories of less safe and least safe. FINDINGS: Of the 55·â€ˆ7 million abortions that occurred worldwide each year between 2010-14, we estimated that 30·6 million (54·9%, 90% uncertainty interval 49·9-59·4) were safe, 17·1 million (30·7%, 25·5-35·6) were less safe, and 8·0 million (14·4%, 11·5-18·1) were least safe. Thus, 25·1 million (45·1%, 40·6-50·1) abortions each year between 2010 and 2014 were unsafe, with 24·3 million (97%) of these in developing countries. The proportion of unsafe abortions was significantly higher in developing countries than developed countries (49·5% vs 12·5%). When grouped by the legal status of abortion, the proportion of unsafe abortions was significantly higher in countries with highly restrictive abortion laws than in those with less restrictive laws. INTERPRETATION: Increased efforts are needed, especially in developing countries, to ensure access to safe abortion. The paucity of empirical data is a limitation of these findings. Improved in-country data for health services and innovative research to address these gaps are needed to improve future estimates. FUNDING: UNDP/UNFPA/UNICEF/WHO/World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction; David and Lucile Packard Foundation; UK Aid from the UK Government; Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs; Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation.

Medical and surgical abortion for women living with HIV.

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines for safe abortion recommend medical abortion with mifepristone and misoprostol or surgical abortion with vacuum aspiration or dilation and evacuation as safe and effective options for women. However, no specific clinical considerations are stipulated within these guidelines for women living with HIV. Concerns have been raised that women living with HIV may be at greater risk of adverse abortion outcomes compared to HIV-uninfected women due to immunosuppression, high rates of co-infection with other sexually transmitted infections, and possible contraindications between medications used for medical abortion and antiretroviral therapy regimens. OBJECTIVES: Our primary objective was to assess the effectiveness and safety of medical versus surgical abortion among women living with HIV. Our secondary objectives were to: (1) compare outcomes of medical and surgical abortion between women living with HIV and women without HIV and (2) describe outcomes of medical and surgical abortion among women living with HIV. SEARCH METHODS: We conducted our search on 17 April 2018. We searched for all published and unpublished trials and observational studies of medical and surgical abortion among women living with HIV. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform using a combination of terms for abortion and HIV. We searched conference websites for relevant abstracts. We also sought unpublished data stratified by HIV status that could be newly analyzed. SELECTION CRITERIA: We considered randomized controlled trials (RCTs), non-RCTs, and observational studies. We considered: (1) studies on the effectiveness and safety of medical versus surgical abortion among women living with HIV; (2) studies comparing outcomes of abortion for both methods between women living with HIV and women without HIV; and (3) studies that described outcomes of abortion among women living with HIV. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: One review author screened the titles, abstracts, citation information, and descriptor terms for citations initially identified by the search. We obtained the full-text articles of all potentially eligible studies when these were available. Two review authors independently examined the full-text articles for compliance with the inclusion criteria and determination of final study selection. We planned to conduct meta-analysis if a sufficient number of studies (at least three) addressed the same research question and presented data on sufficiently comparable outcomes. MAIN RESULTS: Of 3840 records screened, we identified just one conference abstract that met our inclusion criteria. This prospective cohort study assessed the efficacy and acceptability of home administration of misoprostol for early medical abortion among women living with HIV who were of less than 63 days amenorrhea in Ukraine. Medical abortion was effective in 65 of 68 cases (96%) examined. The small number of failures included incomplete abortion (n = 1), heavy bleeding (n = 1), and ongoing pregnancy (n = 1). There were no serious infections. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Due to the paucity of studies, we were unable to determine if outcome differences exist between women living with HIV and women without HIV who undergo medical or surgical abortion. We found no evidence suggesting that medical or surgical abortions are unsafe for women living with HIV. While additional research would strengthen the evidence base, healthcare providers should not be deterred from providing access to safe abortion to their patients living with HIV.

Global Abortion Policies Database: a descriptive analysis of the legal categories of lawful abortion.

BACKGROUND: Texts and interpretations on the lawfulness of abortion and associated administrative requirements can be vague and confusing. It can also be difficult for a woman or provider to know exactly where to look for and how to interpret laws on abortion. To increase transparency, the Global Abortion Policies Database (GAPD), launched in 2017, facilitates the strengthening of knowledge and understanding of the complexities and nuances around lawful abortion as explicitly stated in laws and policies. METHODS: We report on data available in the GAPD as of May 2018. We reviewed the content and wording of laws, policies, standards and guidelines, judgments and other official statements for all countries where data is available in the GAPD. We analyzed data for 158 countries, where abortion is lawful on the woman's request with no requirement for justification and/or for at least one legal ground, including additional indications that are nonequivalent to a single common legal ground. We classified laws on the basis of the explicit wording of the text. The GAPD treats legal categories as the circumstances under which abortion is lawful, that is, allowed or not contrary to law, or explicitly permitted or specified by law. RESULTS: 32% of countries allow or permit abortion at the woman's request with no requirement for justification. Approximately 82% of countries allow or permit abortion to save the woman's life. 64% of countries specify health, physical health and/or mental (or psychological) health. 51% allow or permit abortion based on a fetal condition, 46% of countries allow or permit abortion where the pregnancy is the result of rape, and 10% specify an economic or social ground. Laws may also specify several additional indications that are nonequivalent to a single legal ground. CONCLUSIONS: The GAPD reflects details that exist within countries' laws and highlights the nuance within legal categories of abortion; no assumptions are made as to how laws are interpreted or applied in practice. By examining the text of the law, additional complexities related to the legal categories of abortion become more apparent.

Abortion incidence between 1990 and 2014: global, regional, and subregional levels and trends.

BACKGROUND: Information about the incidence of induced abortion is needed to motivate and inform efforts to help women avoid unintended pregnancies and to monitor progress toward that end. We estimate subregional, regional, and global levels and trends in abortion incidence for 1990 to 2014, and abortion rates in subgroups of women. We use the results to estimate the proportion of pregnancies that end in abortion and examine whether abortion rates vary in countries grouped by the legal status of abortion. METHODS: We requested abortion data from government agencies and compiled data from international sources and nationally representative studies. With data for 1069 country-years, we estimated incidence using a Bayesian hierarchical time series model whereby the overall abortion rate is a function of the modelled rates in subgroups of women of reproductive age defined by their marital status and contraceptive need and use, and the sizes of these subgroups. FINDINGS: We estimated that 35 abortions (90% uncertainty interval [UI] 33 to 44) occurred annually per 1000 women aged 15-44 years worldwide in 2010-14, which was 5 points less than 40 (39-48) in 1990-94 (90% UI for decline -11 to 0). Because of population growth, the annual number of abortions worldwide increased by 5.9 million (90% UI -1.3 to 15.4), from 50.4 million in 1990-94 (48.6 to 59.9) to 56.3 million (52.4 to 70.0) in 2010-14. In the developed world, the abortion rate declined 19 points (-26 to -14), from 46 (41 to 59) to 27 (24 to 37). In the developing world, we found a non-significant 2 point decline (90% UI -9 to 4) in the rate from 39 (37 to 47) to 37 (34 to 46). Some 25% (90% UI 23 to 29) of pregnancies ended in abortion in 2010-14. Globally, 73% (90% UI 59 to 82) of abortions were obtained by married women in 2010-14 compared with 27% (18 to 41) obtained by unmarried women. We did not observe an association between the abortion rates for 2010-14 and the grounds under which abortion is legally allowed. INTERPRETATION: Abortion rates have declined significantly since 1990 in the developed world but not in the developing world. Ensuring access to sexual and reproductive health care could help millions of women avoid unintended pregnancies and ensure access to safe abortion. FUNDING: UK Government, Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation, The David and Lucile Packard Foundation, UNDP/UNFPA/UNICEF/WHO/World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction.

Can community health workers play a greater role in increasing access to medical abortion services? A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Despite being legally available in India since 1971, barriers to safe and legal abortion remain, and unsafe and/or illegal abortion continues to be a problem. Community health workers have been involved in improving access to health information and care for maternal and child health in resource poor settings, but their role in facilitating accurate information about and access to safe abortion has been relatively unexplored. A qualitative study was conducted in Rajasthan, India to study acceptability, perspectives and preferences of women and community health workers, regarding the involvement of community health workers in medical abortion referrals. METHODS: In-depth interviews were conducted with 24 women seeking early medical abortion at legal abortion facilities or presenting at these facilities for a follow-up assessment after medical abortion. Ten community health workers who were trained to assess eligibility for early medical abortion and/or to assess whether women needed a follow-up visit after early medical abortion were also interviewed. The transcripts were coded using ATLAS-ti 7 (version 7.1.4) in the local language and reports were generated for all the codes, emerging themes were identified and the findings were analysed. RESULTS: Community health workers (CHWs) were willing to play a role in assessing eligibility for medical abortion and in identifying women who are in need of follow-up care after early medical abortion, when provided with appropriate training, regular supplies and job aids. Women however had apprehensions about contacting CHWs in relation to abortions. Important barriers that prevented women from seeking information and assistance from community health workers were fear of breach of confidentiality and a perception that they would be pressurised to undergo sterilisation. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings support a potential for greater role of CHWs in making safe abortion information and services accessible to women, while highlighting the need to address women's concerns about approaching CHWs in case of unwanted pregnancy. Further intervention research would be needed to shed light on the effectiveness of role of CHWs in facilitating access to safe abortion and to outline specific components in a programme setting. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Not applicable.

Implementation considerations when expanding health worker roles to include safe abortion care: a five-country case study synthesis.

BACKGROUND: Allowing a broader range of trained health workers to deliver services can be an important way of improving access to safe abortion care. However, the expansion of health worker roles may be challenging to implement. This study aimed to explore factors influencing the implementation of role expansion strategies for non-physician providers to include the delivery of abortion care. METHODS: We conducted a multi-country case study synthesis in Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Nepal, South Africa and Uruguay, where the roles of non-physician providers have been formally expanded to include the provision of abortion care. We searched for documentation from each country related to non-physician providers, abortion care services and role expansion through general internet searches, Google Scholar and PubMed, and gathered feedback from 12 key informants. We carried out a thematic analysis of the data, drawing on categories from the SURE Framework of factors affecting the implementation of policy options. RESULTS: Several factors appeared to affect the successful implementation of including non-physician providers to provide abortion care services. These included health workers' knowledge about abortion legislation and services; and health workers' willingness to provide abortion care. Health workers' willingness appeared to be influenced by their personal views about abortion, the method of abortion and stage of pregnancy and their perceptions of their professional roles. While managers' and co-workers' attitudes towards the use of non-physician providers varied, the synthesis suggests that female clients focused less on the type of health worker and more on factors such as trust, privacy, cost, and closeness to home. Health systems factors also played a role, including workloads and incentives, training, supervision and support, supplies, referral systems, and monitoring and evaluation. Strategies used, with varying success, to address some of these issues in the study countries included values clarification workshops, health worker rotation, access to emotional support for health workers, the incorporation of abortion care services into pre-service curricula, and in-service training strategies. CONCLUSIONS: To increase the likelihood of success for role expansion strategies in the area of safe abortion, programme planners must consider how to ensure motivation, support and reasonable working conditions for affected health workers.

Evaluating implementation of the World Health Organization's Strategic Approach to strengthening sexual and reproductive health policies and programs to address unintended pregnancy and unsafe abortion.

BACKGROUND: We conducted a process evaluation to assess how the World Health Organization's (WHO) Strategic Approach to strengthening sexual and reproductive health policies and programs ("the SA") was used in 15 countries that requested WHO's technical support in addressing unintended pregnancy and unsafe abortion. The SA is a three-stage planning, policy, and program implementation process. We used the social ecological model (SEM) to analyze the contextual factors that influenced SA implementation. METHODS: We used a two-phased sequential approach to data collection and analysis. In Phase A, we conducted a document and literature review and synthesized data thematically. In Phase B, we conducted interviews with stakeholders who used the SA in the countries of interest. We used a qualitative method triangulation technique to analyze and combine data from both phases to understand how the SA was implemented in each country. RESULTS: Data from 145 documents and 19 interviews described the SA process and activities in each country. All 15 countries completed Stage 1 activities. The activities of Stage 1 determined activities in subsequent stages and varied across countries. Following Stage 1, some countries focused on reforming policies to improve access to sexual and reproductive health (SRH) services whereas others focused on improving provider-level capacity to enhance SRH service quality and improving community-level SRH education. We identified factors across SEM levels that affected SA implementation, including individual- and community-level perceptions of using the SA and the recommendations that emerged from its use, organizational capacity to conduct SA activities, and how well these activities aligned with the existing political climate. Stakeholders perceived SA implementation to be country-driven and systematic in bringing attention to important SRH issues in their countries. CONCLUSION: We identified key success factors for influencing the individual, organization, and system change required for implementing the SA. These include sustaining stakeholder engagement for all SA stages, monitoring and reporting on activities, and leveraging activities and outputs from each SA stage to obtain technical and financial support for subsequent stages. Results may be used to optimize ongoing implementation efforts to improve access to and the quality of SRH services.

Nurse versus physician-provision of early medical abortion in Mexico: a randomized controlled non-inferiority trial.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effectiveness, safety, and acceptability of nurse provision of early medical abortion compared to physicians at three facilities in Mexico City. METHODS: We conducted a randomized non-inferiority trial on the provision of medical abortion and contraceptive counselling by physicians or nurses. The participants were pregnant women seeking abortion at a gestational duration of 70 days or less. The medical abortion regimen was 200 mg of oral mifepristone taken on-site followed by 800 µg of misoprostol self-administered buccally at home 24 hours later. Women were instructed to return to the clinic for follow-up 7-15 days later. We did an intention-to-treat analysis for risk differences between physicians' and nurses' provision for completion and the need for surgical intervention. FINDINGS: Of 1017 eligible women, 884 women were included in the intention-to-treat analysis, 450 in the physician-provision arm and 434 in the nurse-provision arm. Women who completed medical abortion, without the need for surgical intervention, were 98.4% (443/450) for physicians' provision and 97.9% (425/434) for nurses' provision. The risk difference between the group was 0.5% (95% confidence interval, CI: -1.2% to 2.3%). There were no differences between providers for examined gestational duration or women's contraceptive method uptake. Both types of providers were rated by the women as highly acceptable. CONCLUSION: Nurses' provision of medical abortion is as safe, acceptable and effective as provision by physicians in this setting. Authorizing nurses to provide medical abortion can help to meet the demand for safe abortion services.

Measuring abortion-related mortality: challenges and opportunities.

Two recent efforts to quantify the causes of maternal deaths on a global scale generated divergent estimates of abortion-related mortality. Such discrepancies in estimates of abortion-related mortality present an important opportunity to explore unique challenges and opportunities associated with the generation and interpretation of abortion-related mortality estimates. While innovations in primary data collection and estimation methodologies are much needed, at the very least, studies that seek to measure maternal deaths due to abortion should endeavor to improve transparency, acknowledge limitations of data, and contextualize results. As we move towards sustainable development goals beyond 2015, the need for valid and reliable estimates of abortion-related mortality has never been more pressing. The post-MDG development agenda that aims to improve global health, reduce health inequities, and increase accountability, requires new and novel approaches be tested to improve measurement and estimation of abortion-related mortality, as well as incidence, safety and morbidity.

Evaluation of a multi-pronged intervention to improve access to safe abortion care in two districts in Jharkhand.

BACKGROUND: Despite the adoption of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act in 1972, access to safe abortion services remains limited in India. Awareness of the legality of abortion also remains low, leading many women to seek services outside the health system. Medical abortion (MA) is an option that has the potential to expand access to safe abortion services. A multi-pronged intervention covering a population of 161,000 in 253 villages in the Silli and Khunti blocks of Jharkhand was conducted between 2007 and 2009, seeking to improve medical abortion services and create awareness at the community level by providing information through community intermediaries and creating an enabling environment through a behavior change communication campaign. The study evaluates the changes in knowledge about abortion-related issues, changes in abortion care-seeking, and service utilization as a result of this intervention. METHODS: A baseline cross-sectional survey was conducted pre-intervention (n = 1,253) followed by an endline survey (n = 1,290) one year after the completion of the intervention phase. In addition, monitoring data from intervention facilities was collected monthly over the study period. RESULTS: Nearly 85% of respondents reported being exposed to safe abortion messaging as a result of the intervention. Awareness of the legality of abortion increased significantly from 19.7% to 57.6% for women, as did awareness of the specific conditions for which abortion is allowed. Results were similar for men. There was also a significant increase in the proportion of men and women who knew of a legal and safe provider and place from where abortion services could be obtained. Multivariate analysis showed positive associations between exposure to any component of the intervention and increased knowledge about legality and gestational age limits, however only interpersonal communication was associated with a significant increase in knowledge of where to obtain safe services (OR 4.8, SE 0.67). Utilization of safe abortion services, and in particular MA, increased at all intervention sites over the duration of the intervention with a shift towards women seeking care earlier in pregnancy. CONCLUSION: The evaluation demonstrates the success of the intervention and its potential for replication in similar contexts within India.

Maternal and perinatal health research priorities beyond 2015: an international survey and prioritization exercise.

BACKGROUND: Maternal mortality has declined by nearly half since 1990, but over a quarter million women still die every year of causes related to pregnancy and childbirth. Maternal-health related targets are falling short of the 2015 Millennium Development Goals and a post-2015 Development Agenda is emerging. In connection with this, setting global research priorities for the next decade is now required. METHODS: We adapted the methods of the Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) to identify and set global research priorities for maternal and perinatal health for the period 2015 to 2025. Priority research questions were received from various international stakeholders constituting a large reference group, and consolidated into a final list of research questions by a technical working group. Questions on this list were then scored by the reference working group according to five independent and equally weighted criteria. Normalized research priority scores (NRPS) were calculated, and research priority questions were ranked accordingly. RESULTS: A list of 190 priority research questions for improving maternal and perinatal health was scored by 140 stakeholders. Most priority research questions (89%) were concerned with the evaluation of implementation and delivery of existing interventions, with research subthemes frequently concerned with training and/or awareness interventions (11%), and access to interventions and/or services (14%). Twenty-one questions (11%) involved the discovery of new interventions or technologies. CONCLUSIONS: Key research priorities in maternal and perinatal health were identified. The resulting ranked list of research questions provides a valuable resource for health research investors, researchers and other stakeholders. We are hopeful that this exercise will inform the post-2015 Development Agenda and assist donors, research-policy decision makers and researchers to invest in research that will ultimately make the most significant difference in the lives of mothers and babies.