An online alternative: a qualitative study of virtual abortion values clarification workshops.

BACKGROUND: Following the U.S. Supreme Court Dobbs decision, access to abortion education is increasingly regionally dependent. Participation in values clarification workshops on abortion can improve abortion knowledge and reduce stigma. Traditionally, values clarification workshops occur in person, yet medical education increasingly utilizes online learning. We sought to understand how a virtual platform impacted medical students and Obstetrics and Gynecology (ObGyn) residents' experience with a values clarification workshop on abortion. METHODS: We conducted values clarification workshops over Zoom with medical students and ObGyn residents at four midwestern teaching hospitals from January 2021-December 2021 during the COVID-19 pandemic. We held semi-structured interviews with participants and facilitators to learn about how the virtual format impacted their experience with the workshop. Four researchers analyzed transcripts using an inductive approach to generate codes then themes. RESULTS: We interviewed 24 medical students, 13 ObGyn residents, and five workshop facilitators. Participants and facilitators found the virtual platform to have both unique advantages and disadvantages. Four central themes were identified: 1) Screen as a barrier: participants noted obstacles to conversation and intimacy. 2) Emotional safety: participants felt comfortable discussing sensitive topics. 3) Ease of access: participants could access virtual workshops regardless of location. 4) Technology-specific features: Zoom features streamlined aspects of the workshop and allowed for anonymous contributions to discussion. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that a virtual platform can be a convenient and effective way to deliver values clarification workshops on abortion, and this technology could be leveraged to expand access to this training in areas without trained facilitators.

'The Biggest Problem With Access': Provider Reports of the Effects of Wisconsin 2011 Act 217 Medication Abortion Legislation.

BACKGROUND: Abortion legislation in the United States determines people's access to services, including the abortion modality of their choice. In 2012, Wisconsin legislators passed Act 217, banning telemedicine for medication abortion and requiring the same physician to be physically present when patients signed state-mandated abortion consent forms and to administer abortion medications over 24 hours later. OBJECTIVE: No research documented real-time outcomes of 2011 Act 217 in Wisconsin; this study documents providers' descriptions of the effects of Wisconsin abortion regulations on providers, patients, and abortion care in the state. METHODS: We interviewed 22 Wisconsin abortion care providers (18 physicians and 4 staff members) about how Act 217 affected abortion provision. We coded transcripts using a combined deductive and inductive approach, then identified themes about how this legislation affects patients and providers. RESULTS: Providers interviewed universally reported that Act 217 negatively affected abortion care, with the same-physician requirement especially increasing risk to patients and demoralizing providers. Interviewees emphasized the lack of medical need for this legislation and explained that Act 217 and the previously enacted 24-hour waiting period worked synergistically to decrease access to medication abortion, disproportionately affecting rural and low-income Wisconsinites. Finally, providers felt Wisconsin's legislative ban on telemedicine medication abortion should be lifted. CONCLUSION: Wisconsin abortion providers interviewed underscored how Act 217, alongside previous regulations, limited medication abortion access in the state. This evidence helps build a case for the harmful effects of non-evidence-based abortion restrictions, which is crucial considering recent deferral to state law after the fall of Roe v Wade in 2022.

"We had to put ourselves in their shoes": Experiences of Medical Students and ObGyn Residents with a Values Clarification Workshop on Abortion.

Purpose: Values clarification workshops on abortion have been shown to increase support for abortion among healthcare workers. However, few studies have examined the impact of values clarification workshops on abortion among medical trainees. This study aimed to understand medical student and obstetrics and gynecology (ObGyn) residents' experiences with a virtual values clarification workshop on abortion. Methods: Clerkship year medical students and ObGyn residents at four midwestern teaching hospitals were invited to be interviewed about their experiences in a virtual values clarification workshop on abortion from January 2021 through December 2021. A single interviewer conducted interviews via Zoom using a standardized interview guide. Participants were asked to provide feedback and discuss their experiences in the workshop. Four qualitatively trained evaluators coded the interview transcripts in NVivo, using an inductive approach to establish consensus codes then themes. Results: This study interviewed 37 trainees, including 24 medical students and 13 ObGyn residents, as well as five facilitators, between November 2021 and February 2022. Three themes emerged in both trainee groups. First, participants found the workshops helped trainees clarify and understand their own views on abortion through thought exploration, peer validation, and reflection on their views' potential societal impacts. Second, through the workshop, participants reflected on others' opinions on abortion and better understood the spectrum of beliefs their peers held. Finally, participants found the workshops helped them explore and develop their professional identity as physicians-in-training, through practicing communication skills and building trust and mutual respect among peers. Conclusions: Medical trainees found values clarification workshops on abortion to be valuable, helping them establish their own beliefs about abortion, contextualize these beliefs among their peers', and practice professionalism. These findings indicate that values clarification workshops can play a key role in helping medical trainees discuss abortion and prepare for their professional future.

Indigenous Women's Perspectives on Contraception in Rural Guatemala.

In rural, Indigenous Guatemala, women's healthcare is fragmented and inadequate. Our interdisciplinary, multinational research team aimed to 1) describe reproductive health in one rural Indigenous community; 2) explore contraceptive use; and 3) learn about and prioritize Indigenous Maya women's reproductive health beliefs and needs. Our study team conducted mixed-methods surveys with 62 women, led focus groups with 20 community health workers, and analyzed data using concurrent mixed methods analysis. We found that 51% of women surveyed reported current family planning, with 33% using a biomedical method. We found high mean fertility, 6.9 live births per woman aged 40-49 (national average 4.7), with significant socioeconomic variation. We also found that poverty correlated with total fertility, while education inversely correlated. Our research found that contraceptive use had a strong association with access to healthcare and with women's reported sexual autonomy (which we instrumentalized based on women's answers to the question "can you refuse to have sex with your husband?"). Many women we spoke to feared contraception, specifically concerned it could cause cancer. Overall, Guatemalan Indigenous women expressed unease seeking reproductive healthcare within health systems that have historically and currently excluded and mistreated Indigenous communities. Our research documented unexplored influences on contraceptive use, including the relationship between sexual autonomy and contraception and widespread concern of cancer with contraceptive use. We conclude, moving forward, that we and other researchers should continue to collaborate with communities to improve Indigenous women's reproductive healthcare.

Real-Time Effects of Payer Restrictions on Reproductive Healthcare: A Qualitative Analysis of Cost-Related Barriers and Their Consequences among U.S. Abortion Seekers on Reddit.

OBJECTIVE: The Hyde Amendment and related policies limit or prohibit Medicaid coverage of abortion services in the United States. Most research on cost-related abortion barriers relies on clinic-based samples, but people who desire abortions may never make it to a healthcare center. To examine a novel, pre-abortion population, we analyzed a unique qualitative dataset of posts from Reddit, a widely used social media platform increasingly leveraged by researchers, to assess financial obstacles among anonymous posters considering abortion. METHODS: In February 2020, we used Python to web-scrape the 250 most recent posts that mentioned abortion, removing all identifying information and usernames. After transferring all posts into NVivo, a qualitative software package, the team identified all datapoints related to cost. Three qualitatively trained evaluators established and applied codes, reaching saturation after 194 posts. The research team used a descriptive qualitative approach, using both inductive and deductive elements, to identify and analyze themes related to financial barriers. RESULTS: We documented multiple cost-related deterrents, including lack of funds for both the procedure and attendant travel costs, inability to afford desired abortion modality (i.e., medication or surgical), and for some, consideration of self-managed abortion options due to cost barriers. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from this study underscore the centrality of cost barriers and third-party payer restrictions to stymying reproductive health access in the United States. Results may contribute to the growing evidence base and building political momentum focused on repealing the Hyde Amendment.