Failure of the Law to Grant Access to Legal Abortion in Chile.

Introduction: In 2017, Chile decriminalized abortion on three grounds: (i) if the pregnant person's life is at risk, (ii) fetal nonviability, and (iii) rape or incest. This multicase study explores the experiences of pregnant people legally entitled to but denied access to legal abortion in Chile. Methods: Through a snowball sampling approach, we recruited adult Chilean residents who sought, were eligible for, and were denied a legal abortion after September 2017. We conducted semistructured interviews with participants to explore their experiences in seeking and being denied legal abortions. We recorded and transcribed the interviews, then coded and analyzed the transcriptions to identify common themes. Results: We identified four women who met the eligibility criteria. The interviews revealed five common themes in their experiences: (i) disparate levels of social support in accessing abortion, (ii) abundant access barriers, (iii) forced pregnancy, (iv) abortion stigma, and (v) a failure of the law to provide access to abortion. Discussion and Health Equity Implications: Although the 2017 law expanded legal access to abortion in Chile, significant barriers remain. Compounded with social stigma, and the socioeconomic disparities in abortion access, pregnant people continue to face insurmountable obstacles in obtaining legal abortions, even when their lives are at risk and the pregnancy is not viable. The state must prioritize equity of access to legal abortions. Future studies should continue to explore the challenges people face accessing legal abortion care to inform strategies to ensure people are able to obtain the quality care that they are legally entitled to.

Access to Reproductive Health Services Among People With Disabilities.

Importance: People with disabilities face inequitable access to reproductive health (RH) services, yet the national prevalence of barriers to access experienced across disability types and statuses is unknown. Objective: To assess the national prevalence of barriers to RH access experienced by people with disabilities. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study analyzed results of an online probability-based national survey of RH experiences that was conducted from December 2021 to January 2022. The national sample consisted of English- and Spanish-speaking panel members of a market research firm. Panelists were invited to participate in a survey on their RH experiences and opinions. These participants were aged 15 to 49 years and assigned female at birth (AFAB). Weighted proportions were estimated, and bivariable and multivariable regression analyses were performed to assess associations between disability status and barriers to accessing RH services. Exposure: Using 5 of the 6 Washington Group Short Set on Functioning items, 8 dichotomous disability indicators were created: (1) vision, (2) hearing, (3) mobility, (4) activities of daily living, (5) communication, (6) overall disability status (a lot or more difficulty functioning in ≥1 domain), (7) some difficulty functioning (below the disability threshold; some or more difficulty functioning in ≥1 domain), and (8) multiple disabilities (a lot or more difficulty functioning in ≥2 domains). Main Outcomes and Measures: Number and types of barriers (logistical, access, cost, privacy, and interpersonal relationship) to accessing RH services in the past 3 years. Results: After exclusion, the final sample included 6956 people AFAB, with a mean (SD) age of 36.0 (8.3) years. Of these participants, 8.5% (95% CI, 7.6%-9.5%) met the disability threshold. Participants with disabilities compared with those without disabilities were disproportionately more likely to be non-Hispanic Black (18.8% [95% CI, 14.4%-24.1%] vs 13.2% [95% CI, 11.9%-14.5%]) or Hispanic or Latinx (completed survey in English: 18.1% [95% CI, 14.0%-23.0%] vs 14.6% [95% CI, 13.3%-16.0%]; completed survey in Spanish: 8.9% [95% CI, 6.2%-12.8%] vs 6.2% [95% CI, 5.4%-7.1%]) individuals, to identify as LGBTQAI (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer [or questioning], asexual [or allied], intersex; 16.4% [95% CI, 12.3%-21.6%] vs 11.8% [95% CI, 10.6%-13.1%]), to live below the federal poverty level (27.3% [95% CI, 22.3%-32.8%] vs 10.7% [95% CI, 9.7%-11.9%]), and to ever experienced medical mistreatment (49.6% [95% CI, 43.7%-55.5%] vs 36.5% [95% CI, 34.8%-38.2%]). Among those who had ever tried to access RH services (n = 6027), people with disabilities vs without disabilities were more likely to experience barriers (69.0% [95% CI, 62.9%-74.5%] vs 43.0% [95% CI, 41.2%-44.9%]), which were most often logistical (50.7%; 95% CI, 44.2%-57.2%) and access (49.9%; 95% CI, 43.4%-56.4%) barriers. The disability domains with the highest proportion of people who experienced 3 or more barriers in the past 3 years included activities of daily living (75.3%; 95% CI, 61.1%-85.6%), communication (65.1%; 95% CI, 49.5%-78.1%), and multiple (59.9%; 95% CI, 45.6%-72.7%) disabilities. Conclusions and Relevance: This cross-sectional study found large disparities in access to RH services among people AFAB with disabilities. Findings indicated a need to alleviate barriers to RH care, including improving the transportation infrastructure and reinforcing patient-centered approaches that engender inclusivity in health care settings.

Accuracy of Self-assessment of Gestational Duration Among Adolescents Seeking Abortion Using Information in Addition to Date of Last Menstrual Period.

This diagnostic study evaluates whether using additional information beyond the date of last menstrual period is associated with improved accuracy of self-assessed gestational duration among adolescents seeking abortion.

Mail-order pharmacy dispensing of mifepristone for medication abortion after in-person clinical assessment.

OBJECTIVE(S): To estimate the effectiveness, acceptability, and feasibility of medication abortion with mifepristone dispensed by a mail-order pharmacy after in-person clinical assessment. STUDY DESIGN: This is an interim analysis of an ongoing prospective cohort study conducted at five sites. Clinicians assessed patients in clinic and, if they were eligible for medication abortion and ≤ 63 days' gestation, electronically sent prescriptions for mifepristone 200 mg orally and misoprostol 800 mcg buccally to a mail-order pharmacy, which shipped medications for next-day delivery. Participants completed surveys three and 14 days after enrollment, and we abstracted medical chart data. RESULTS: Between January 2020 and April 2021 we enrolled 240 participants and obtained clinical outcome information for 227 (94.6%); 3 reported not taking either medication. Of those with abortion outcome information (N = 224), 216 (96.4%) completed day-3 and 212 (94.6%) day-14 surveys. Of the 224 that took medications, none reported taking past 70 days' gestation, and complete medication abortion occurred for 217 participants (96.9%, 95% CI 93.7%-98.7%). Most received medications within three days (82.1%, 95% CI 76.5%-86.9%). In the day-3 survey, 95.4% (95% CI 91.7%-97.8%) reported being very (88.4%) or somewhat (6.9%) satisfied with receiving medications by mail. In the day-14 survey, 89.6% (95% CI 84.7%-93.4%) said they would use the mail-order service again if needed. Eleven (4.9%, 95% CI 2.5%-8.6%) experienced adverse events; two were serious (one blood transfusion, one hospitalization), and none were related to mail-order pharmacy dispensing. CONCLUSIONS: Medication abortion with mail-order pharmacy dispensing of mifepristone appears effective, feasible, and acceptable to patients. IMPLICATIONS: The in-person dispensing requirement for mifepristone, codified in the drug's Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy, should be removed.

Accuracy of self-assessment of gestational duration among people seeking abortion.

BACKGROUND: Mifepristone, used together with misoprostol, is approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration for medication abortion through 10 weeks' gestation. Although in-person ultrasound is frequently used to establish medication abortion eligibility, previous research demonstrates that people seeking abortion early in pregnancy can accurately self-assess gestational duration using the date of their last menstrual period. OBJECTIVE: In this study, we establish the screening performance of a broader set of questions for self-assessment of gestational duration among a sample of people seeking abortion at a wide range of gestations. STUDY DESIGN: We surveyed patients seeking abortion at 7 facilities before ultrasound and compared self-assessments of gestational duration using 11 pregnancy dating questions with measurements on ultrasound. For individual pregnancy dating questions and combined questions, we established screening performance focusing on metrics of diagnostic accuracy, defined as the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, sensitivity (or the proportion of ineligible participants who correctly screened as ineligible for medication abortion), and proportion of false negatives (ie, the proportion of all participants who erroneously screened as eligible for medication abortion). We tested for differences in sensitivity across individual and combined questions using McNemar's test, and for differences in accuracy using the area under the receiver operating curve and Sidak adjusted P values. RESULTS: One-quarter (25%) of 1089 participants had a gestational duration of >70 days on ultrasound. Using the date of last menstrual period alone demonstrated 83.5% sensitivity (95% confidence interval, 78.4-87.9) in identifying participants with gestational durations of >70 days on ultrasound, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.82 (95% confidence interval, 0.79-0.85) and a proportion of false negatives of 4.0%. A composite measure of responses to questions on number of weeks pregnant, date of last menstrual period, and date they got pregnant demonstrated 89.1% sensitivity (95% confidence interval, 84.7-92.6) and an area under the receiver operating curve of 0.86 (95% confidence interval, 0.83-0.88), with 2.7% of false negatives. A simpler question set focused on being >10 weeks or >2 months pregnant or having missed 2 or more periods had comparable sensitivity (90.7%; 95% confidence interval, 86.6-93.9) and proportion of false negatives (2.3%), but with a slightly lower area under the receiver operating curve (0.82; 95% confidence interval, 0.79-0.84). CONCLUSION: In a sample representative of people seeking abortion nationally, broadening the screening questions for assessing gestational duration beyond the date of the last menstrual period resulted in improved accuracy and sensitivity of self-assessment at the 70-day threshold for medication abortion. Ultrasound assessment for medication abortion may not be necessary, especially when requiring ultrasound could increase COVID-19 risk or healthcare costs, restrict access, or limit patient choice.

Prevalence of Self-Managed Abortion Among Women of Reproductive Age in the United States.

Importance: Increasing evidence indicates that people are attempting their own abortions outside the formal health care system. However, population-based estimates of experience with self-managed abortion (SMA) are lacking. Objective: To estimate the prevalence of SMA attempts among the general US population. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional survey study was fielded August 2 to 17, 2017 among English- and Spanish- speaking, self-identified female panel members from the GfK web-based KnowledgePanel. Women ages 18 to 49 years were approached to complete a 1-time survey. Data were analyzed from September 22, 2017, to March 26, 2020. Main Outcomes and Measures: SMA was defined as "some women may do something on their own to try to end a pregnancy without medical assistance. For example, they may get information from the internet, a friend, or family member about pills, medicine, or herbs they can take on their own, or they may do something else to try to end the pregnancy." SMA was assessed using the question, "Have you ever taken or used something on your own, without medical assistance, to try to end an unwanted pregnancy?" Participants reporting SMA were asked about methods used, reasons, and outcomes. Factors associated with SMA experience, including age, race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status, nativity, reproductive health history, and geography, were assessed. Projected lifetime SMA prevalence was estimated using discrete-time event history models, adjusting for abortion underreporting. Results: Among 14 151 participants invited to participate, 7022 women (49.6%) (mean [SE] age, 33.9 [9.0] years) agreed to participate. Among these, 57.4% (95% CI, 55.8%-59.0%) were non-Hispanic White, 20.2% (95% CI, 18.9%-21.5%) were Hispanic, and 13.3% (95% CI, 12.1%-14.5%) were non-Hispanic Black; and 15.1% (95% CI, 14.1%-16.3%) reported living at less than 100% federal poverty level (FPL). A total of 1.4% (95% CI, 1.0%-1.8%) of participants reported a history of attempting SMA while in the US. Projected lifetime prevalence of SMA adjusting for underreporting of abortion was 7.0% (95% CI, 5.5%-8.4%). In bivariable analyses, non-Hispanic Black (prevalence ratio [PR], 3.16; 95% CI, 1.48-6.75) and Hispanic women surveyed in English (PR, 3.74; 95% CI, 1.78-7.87) were more likely than non-Hispanic White women to have attempted SMA. Women living below 100% of the FPL were also more likely to have attempted SMA compared with those at 200% FPL or greater (PR, 3.43; 95% CI, 1.83-6.42). At most recent SMA attempt, 20.0% (95% CI, 10.9%-33.8%) of respondents used misoprostol, 29.2% (95% CI, 17.5%-44.5%) used another medication or drug, 38.4% (95% CI, 25.3%-53.4%) used herbs, and 19.8% (95% CI, 10.0%-35.5%) used physical methods. The most common reasons for SMA included that it seemed faster or easier (47.2% [95% CI, 33.0%-61.8%]) and the clinic was too expensive (25.2% [95% CI, 15.7%-37.7%]). Of all attempts, 27.8% (95% CI, 16.6%-42.7%) of respondents reported they were successful; the remainder reported they had subsequent facility-based abortions (33.6% [95% CI, 21.0%-49.0%]), continued the pregnancy (13.4% [95% CI, 7.4%-23.1%]), had a miscarriage (11.4% [95% CI, 4.2%-27.5%]), or were unsure (13.3% [95% CI, 6.8%-24.7%]). A total of 11.0% (95% CI, 5.5%-21.0%) of respondents reported a complication. Conclusions and Relevance: This cross-sectional study found that approximately 7% of US women reported having attempted SMA in their lifetime, commonly with ineffective methods. These findings suggest that surveys of SMA experience among patients at abortion clinics may capture only one-third of SMA attempts. People's reasons for attempting SMA indicate that as abortion becomes more restricted, SMA may become more common.

The effect of receiving versus being denied an abortion on making and achieving aspirational 5-year life plans.

BACKGROUND: Popular support for access to abortion and contraceptive services is often based on the idea that they will help women determine the trajectory of their life course. This study examined whether receiving versus being denied an abortion affects aspirational life goal setting and attainment 5 years later. METHODS: We compared women who sought and were denied an abortion because they were 3 weeks beyond the gestational limit ('Parenting-Turnaways') to those who received an abortion in the first trimester ('First-Trimesters'); received an abortion within 2 weeks of the facility's gestational limit ('Near-Limits'); and sought an abortion, were turned away and received an abortion elsewhere or placed their baby for adoption ('Non-Parenting-Turnaways'). We used mixed effects logistic regression analyses to estimate the odds of setting an aspirational plan and to estimate the odds of both setting and achieving an aspirational 5-year plan. RESULTS: At 1 week post abortion-seeking, 791 women reported 1864 5-year plans, most of which were aspirational (n=1692, 91%). Parenting-Turnaways had lower odds of setting an aspirational 5-year plan than Near-Limits (OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.73). There were no differences by group in achieving aspirational 5-year plans among those who had them. CONCLUSIONS: Soon after abortion-seeking, women denied a wanted abortion were less optimistic about their long-term futures than women who received a wanted abortion. Abortion access can help women set positive long-term goals.

Effects of Carrying an Unwanted Pregnancy to Term on Women's Existing Children.

OBJECTIVE: To examine how receiving or being denied a wanted abortion affects the subsequent development, health, caregiving, and socioeconomics of women's existing children at time of seeking abortion. STUDY DESIGN: The Turnaway Study is a 5-year longitudinal study with a quasi-experimental design. Women were recruited from January 2008 to December 2010 from 30 abortion facilities throughout the US. We interviewed women regarding the health and development of their living children via telephone 1 week after seeking an abortion and semiannually for 5 years. We compare the youngest existing children younger than the age 5 years of women denied abortion because they presented for care beyond a facility's gestational limit (Turnaway group) with those of women who received the abortion (Abortion group). We used mixed-effects regression models to test for differences in outcomes of existing children of women in the Turnaway group (n = 55 children) compared with existing children of women in the Abortion group (n = 293 children). RESULTS: From 6 months to 4.5 years after their mothers sought abortions, existing children of women denied abortions had lower mean child development scores (adjusted ß -0.04, 95% CI -0.07 to -0.00) and were more likely to live below the Federal Poverty Level (aOR 3.74, 95% CI 1.59-8.79) than the children of women who received a wanted abortion. There were no significant differences in child health or time spent with a caregiver other than the mother. CONCLUSIONS: Denying women a wanted abortion may have negative developmental and socioeconomic consequences for their existing children.

Support for and interest in alternative models of medication abortion provision among a national probability sample of U.S. women.

OBJECTIVE: The objective was to assess women's personal interest in and support for three alternative models of medication abortion (MA) provision. STUDY DESIGN: Using an online survey of a U.S. national, probability-based representative sample of women ages 18-49, we gauged personal interest in and general support for three alternative models for accessing abortion pills: (1) in advance from a doctor for future use, (2) over-the-counter (OTC) from a drugstore and (3) online without a prescription. We conducted multivariable analyses to identify characteristics associated with support for these provision models. RESULTS: Fifty percent (n=7022) of eligible women invited completed the survey. Nearly half (49%) supported and 30% were personally interested in one or more of the three access models; 44% supported advance provision, 37% supported OTC access, and 29% supported online access. Common advantages reported for advance provision, OTC and online access included privacy (49%, 29% and 46%, respectively), convenience (38%, 44% and 38%) and being able to end the pregnancy earlier (48%, 40% and 29%). Common disadvantages included concern that women might take the pills incorrectly (55%, 53% and 57%), not seeing a clinician before the abortion (52%, 54% and 53%) and safety (42%, 43% and 60%). History of abortion and experiencing barriers accessing reproductive health services were associated with greater support for the alternative models. CONCLUSION: Women are interested in and support alternative models of MA provision, in particular, advance provision. However, they also reported concerns about incorrect pill use and not seeing a clinician beforehand. IMPLICATIONS: Offering women more choices in how they access medication abortion, including options where they can safely self-manage their own care, has the potential to expand access to care.

"Birth Control can Easily Take a Back Seat": Challenges Providing IUDs in Community Health Care Settings.

OBJECTIVE: To assess community health centers' (CHCs) capacity to offer streamlined intrauterine devices (IUDs) services. METHODS: Prior to implementing a contraceptive training project, we surveyed health care staff (N=97) from 11 CHC sites that offer IUDs onsite. Twenty interviews with clinicians explored more deeply their challenges offering IUDs in the CHC setting. RESULTS: Most practices required multiple visits for IUD placement, most (66%) clinician survey respondents had placed an IUD and 19% had placed an IUD as emergency contraception. Need for screening tests, scheduling challenges, pressures to meet patient quotas, and lack of priority given to women's health hindered streamlined IUD provision. CONCLUSIONS: Although access to IUDs has increased, significant barriers to provision in CHC settings persist. Clinic policies may need to address a variety of system and provider-level barriers to meet the needs of patients.

Expanding the Abortion Provider Workforce: A Qualitative Study of Organizations Implementing a New California Policy.

CONTEXT: Access to abortion care in the United States varies according to multiple factors, including location, state regulation and provider availability. In 2013, California enacted a law that authorized nurse practitioners (NPs), certified nurse-midwives (CNMs) and physician assistants (PAs) to provide first-trimester aspiration abortions; little is known about organizations' experiences in implementing this policy change. METHODS: Beginning 10 and 24 months after implementation of the new law, semistructured interviews were conducted with 20 administrators whose five organizations trained and employed NPs, CNMs and PAs as providers of aspiration abortions. Interview data on the organizations' experiences were analyzed thematically, and facilitators of and barriers to implementation were identified. RESULTS: Administrators were committed to the provision of aspiration abortions by NPs, CNMs and PAs, and nearly all identified improved access to care and complication management as clear benefits of the policy change. However, integration of the new providers was uneven and depended on a variety of circumstances. Organizational disincentives included financial and logistical costs incurred in trying to deploy and integrate the different types of providers. Some administrators found that increased costs were outweighed by improved patient care, whereas others did not. In general, having a strong administrative champion within the organization made a critical difference. CONCLUSIONS: California's expansion of the abortion-providing workforce had a positive impact on patient care in the sampled organizations. However, various organizational obstacles must be addressed to more fully realize the benefits of having NPs, CNMs and PAs provide aspiration abortions.

Role of Insurance Coverage in Contraceptive Use After Abortion.

OBJECTIVE: To assess postaspiration abortion contraceptive use and the role of insurance coverage for abortion in a state that covers abortion and contraception for low-income women. METHODS: This is a secondary analysis of a previously published prospective study to assess the safety of abortion provision. From 2007 through 2013, women seeking first-trimester aspiration abortion were recruited at 25 clinical facilities within four Planned Parenthood affiliates and Kaiser Permanente of Northern California. Patients' medical charts were reviewed to assess the contraceptive methods received on the day of the abortion. A 4-week follow-up survey assessed contraceptive use and contraceptive-related incidents. Primary outcomes included leaving with any method on the day of the abortion and use of any method at the 4-week assessment. Secondary outcomes included intrauterine device or implant use on the day of the procedure and at 4 weeks and switching to a less effective method at 4 weeks. RESULTS: A total of 19,673 women agreed to participate, and 13,904 (71%) completed the 4-week follow-up survey. Ninety-four percent (18,486/19,673) left their abortion visit with a contraceptive method: 21% (4,111/19,673) with an intrauterine device, implant, or permanent method. By the 4-week survey, 8% (1,135/13,904) switched from a high- or medium-efficacy method to a low-efficacy or no method; 0.4% (60/13,904) experienced a contraceptive incident. In adjusted regression analyses, women who paid for the abortion with Medicaid were significantly more likely to use any method (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 3.70, 95% CI 3.09-4.42) or an intrauterine device or implant (adjusted OR 2.14, 95% CI 1.92-2.38) on the day of the abortion than those who did not pay with insurance. Experiencing a contraceptive-related incident was associated with switching to a low-efficacy or no method by the 4-week survey (adjusted OR 3.98, 95% CI 2.20-7.22). CONCLUSION: Insurance coverage for abortion is associated with postabortion contraceptive provision and use, even in settings that cover abortions and contraception for low-income women.

The Role of Publicly Funded Family Planning Sites In Health Insurance Enrollment.

CONTEXT: Publicly funded family planning providers are well positioned to help uninsured individuals learn about health insurance coverage options and effectively navigate the enrollment process. Understanding how these providers are engaged in enrollment assistance and the challenges they face in providing assistance is important for maximizing their role in health insurance outreach and enrollment. METHODS: In 2014, some 684 sites participating in California's family planning program were surveyed about their involvement in helping clients enroll in health insurance. Weighted univariate and bivariate analyses were conducted to examine enrollment activities and perceived barriers to facilitating enrollment by site characteristics. RESULTS: Most family planning program sites provided eligibility screening (68%), enrollment education (77%), on-site enrollment assistance (55%) and referrals for off-site enrollment support (91%). The proportion of sites offering each type of assistance was highest among community clinics (83-96%), primary care and multispecialty sites (65-95%), Title X-funded sites (72-98%), sites with contracts to provide primary care services (64-93%) and sites using only electronic health records (66-94%). Commonly identified barriers to providing assistance were lack of staff time (reported by 52% of sites), lack of funding (47%), lack of physical space (34%) and lack of staff knowledge (33%); only 20% of sites received funding to support enrollment activities. CONCLUSIONS: Although there were significant variations among them, publicly funded family planning providers in California are actively engaged in health insurance enrollment. Supporting their vital role in enrollment could help in the achievement of universal health insurance coverage.

Projections and opinions from 100 experts in long-acting reversible contraception.

OBJECTIVE: This survey of published researchers of long-acting reversible contraceptives (LARCs) examines their opinions about important barriers to LARC use in the United States (US), projections for LARC use in the absence of barriers and attitudes toward incentives for clinicians to provide and women to use LARC methods. STUDY DESIGN: We identified 182 authors of 59 peer-reviewed papers on LARC use published since 2013. A total of 104 completed an internet survey. We used descriptive and multivariate analyses to assess LARC use barriers and respondent characteristics associated with LARC projections and opinions. RESULTS: The most commonly identified barrier was the cost of the device (63%), followed by women's knowledge of safety, method acceptability and expectations about use. A shortage of trained providers was a commonly cited barrier, primarily of primary care providers (49%). Median and modal projections of LARC use in the absence of these barriers were 25-29% of contracepting women. There was limited support for provider incentives and almost no support for incentives for women to use LARC methods, primarily out of concern about coercion. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical and social science LARC experts project at least a doubling of the current US rate of LARC use if barriers to method provision and adoption are removed. While LARC experts recognize the promise of LARC methods to better meet women's contraceptive needs, they anticipate that the majority of US women will not choose LARC methods. Reducing unintended pregnancy rates will depend on knowledge, availability and use of a wider range of methods of contraception to meet women's individual needs. IMPLICATIONS: Efforts to increase LARC use need to meet the dual goals of increasing access to LARC methods and protecting women's reproductive autonomy. To accomplish this, we need reasonable expectations for use, provider training, low-cost devices and noncoercive counseling, rather than incentives for provision or use.

California Family Planning Health Care Providers' Challenges to Same-Day Long-Acting Reversible Contraception Provision.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the extent to which practices offering family planning services are able to offer intrauterine devices (IUDs) and implants in one visit and to identify the reasons why multiple visits may be required. METHODS: In the fall of 2011, 1,000 California family planning providers were asked about their long-acting reversible contraception delivery practices in a probability survey. We used multivariable logistic regression to examine practice characteristics associated with same-day provision of IUDs and implants. RESULTS: Among the 636 responding practices, 67% offered an IUD and 40% offered a contraceptive implant onsite. Among those with onsite provision, the majority required two or more visits to place an IUD (58%); almost half required two visits to place an implant (47%). Nearly all Planned Parenthood practices could place an IUD (95%) or implant (95%) at the initial visit, whereas the majority of all other practice types could not. The main reasons for delaying IUD and contraceptive implant provision included the need to screen and wait for test results (68% and 24%, respectively) and clinic flow and scheduling issues (50% and 64%, respectively). Multivariable analyses indicated that Planned Parenthood practices were significantly more likely than private practices to have same-day insertion protocols. CONCLUSION: Most of the family planning providers surveyed have not adopted same-day long-acting reversible contraception insertion protocols and face barriers to same-day provision. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Potential public sector cost-savings from over-the-counter access to oral contraceptives.

OBJECTIVE: This study estimates how making oral contraceptive pills (OCPs) available without a prescription may affect contraceptive use, unintended pregnancies and associated contraceptive and pregnancy costs among low-income women. STUDY DESIGN: Based on published figures, we estimate two scenarios [low over-the-counter (OTC) use and high OTC use] of the proportion of low-income women likely to switch to an OTC pill and predict adoption of OCPs according to the out-of-pocket costs per pill pack. We then estimate cost-savings of each scenario by comparing the total public sector cost of providing OCPs OTC and medical care for unintended pregnancy. RESULTS: Twenty-one percent of low-income women at risk for unintended pregnancy are very likely to use OCPs if they were available without a prescription. Women's use of OTC OCPs varies widely by the out-of-pocket pill pack cost. In a scenario assuming no out-of-pocket costs for the over-the counter pill, an additional 11-21% of low-income women will use the pill, resulting in a 20-36% decrease in the number of women using no method or a method less effective than the pill, and a 7-25% decrease in the number of unintended pregnancies, depending on the level of use and any effect on contraceptive failure rates. CONCLUSIONS: If out-of-pocket costs for such pills are low, OTC access could have a significant effect on use of effective contraceptives and unintended pregnancy. Public health plans may reduce expenditures on pregnancy and contraceptive healthcare services by covering oral contraceptives as an OTC product. IMPLICATIONS: Interest in OTC access to oral contraceptives is high. Removing the prescription barrier, particularly if pill packs are available at low or zero out-of-pocket cost, could increase the use of effective methods of contraception and reduce unintended pregnancy and healthcare costs for contraceptive and pregnancy care.

Risk of violence from the man involved in the pregnancy after receiving or being denied an abortion.

BACKGROUND: Intimate partner violence is common among women having abortions, with between 6% and 22% reporting recent violence from an intimate partner. Concern about violence is a reason some pregnant women decide to terminate their pregnancies. Whether risk of violence decreases after having an abortion, remains unknown. METHODS: Data are from the Turnaway Study, a prospective cohort study of women seeking abortions at 30 facilities across the U.S. Participants included women who: presented just prior to a facility's gestational age limit and received abortions (Near Limit Abortion Group, n = 452), presented just beyond the gestational limit and were denied abortions (Turnaways, n = 231), and received first trimester abortions (First Trimester Abortion Group, n = 273). Mixed effects logistic regression was used to assess the relationship between receiving versus being denied abortion and subsequent violence from the man involved in the pregnancy over 2.5 years. RESULTS: Physical violence decreased for Near Limits (adjusted odds ratios (aOR), 0.93 per month; 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.90, 0.96), but not Turnaways who gave birth (P < .05 versus Near Limits). The decrease for First Trimesters was similar to Near Limits (P = .324). Psychological violence decreased for all groups (aOR, 0.97; CI 0.94, 1.00), with no differential change across groups. CONCLUSIONS: Policies restricting abortion provision may result in more women being unable to terminate unwanted pregnancies, potentially keeping them in contact with violent partners, and putting women and their children at risk.

Factors influencing the provision of long-acting reversible contraception in California.

OBJECTIVE: To assess long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) beliefs and practices among site directors who represent the family planning services delivered in their practices. METHODS: Medical directors from 1,000 sites listed in the Family Planning Access Care and Treatment program (California's family planning Medicaid program) provider database were mailed a survey in the fall of 2011 regarding their LARC beliefs and practices. Participants responded by mail, online, or telephone. Data on family planning clients served and LARC dispensing were obtained from administrative claims data. All analyses were limited to advanced practice clinician respondents. General estimating equation models identified the respondent and practice characteristics associated with LARC provision. RESULTS: After three follow-up mailings and telephone calls, 68% of eligible sites responded to the survey (636/939). Most respondents were physicians (448/587). They were most likely to consider women with a history of pelvic inflammatory disease unsuitable for hormonal (27%, n=161) and copper (26%, n=154) intrauterine devices. Smokers were the most likely to be considered unsuitable for the implant (16%, n=96). Nearly three fourths of respondents routinely discussed intrauterine devices (413/561) and half (271/558) discussed implants with their contraceptive patients. Characteristics that predicted onsite LARC provision included LARC training, beliefs, and health care provider type. CONCLUSION: Although there has been significant progress in expanding access and understanding about LARC, many clinicians from sites offering family planning services held beliefs limiting the provision of intrauterine devices and were unfamiliar with the implant, suggesting the need for targeted trainings aimed at informing clinicians of recent developments in LARC recommendations.

The role of intimate partners in women's reasons for seeking abortion.

PURPOSE: The literature on partners and abortion focuses on intimate partner violence (IPV) and risk for abortion, and partners' control of women's abortion decisions. This paper examines how partners figure in women's abortion decisions, and identifies factors associated with identifying partner as a reason (PAR) for abortion. METHODS: Baseline data were used from the Turnaway Study, a longitudinal study among women (n = 954) seeking abortion at 30 U.S. facilities between 2008 and 2010. Mixed methods were used. Data were analyzed using thematic coding and logistic regression. FINDINGS: Nearly one third of women reported PAR for abortion. Three most common partner-related reasons were poor relationships, partners unable/unwilling to support a baby, and partner characteristics that made them undesirable to have a baby with. Eight percent who mentioned PAR identified having abusive partners as a reason for abortion. One woman in this subgroup reported being pressured by her partner to seek abortion, whereas others in this subgroup sought abortion to end abusive relationships or to avoid bringing children into abusive relationships. Factors associated with identifying PAR for seeking abortion included race, education, partner's pregnancy intentions, relationship with man involved in the pregnancy, and experience of IPV. CONCLUSION: Women make decisions to terminate pregnancies considering the quality of the relationship with and potential support they will receive from the man involved. Even women who report IPV, who may be vulnerable to coercion, report their motivation for the abortion is to end an abusive relationship, rather than coercion into abortion.