What do Australian primary care clinicians need to provide long-acting reversible contraception and early medical abortion? A content analysis of a virtual community of practice.

BACKGROUND: Uptake of long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) is lower in Australia compared with other high-income countries, and access to early medical abortion (EMA) is variable with only 11% of general practitioners (GPs) providing EMA. The AusCAPPS (Australian Contraception and Abortion Primary Care Practitioner Support) Network is a virtual community of practice established to support GPs, nurses and pharmacists to provide LARC and EMA in primary care. Evaluating participant engagement with AusCAPPS presents an opportunity to understand clinician needs in relation to LARC and EMA care. METHODS: Data were collected from July 2021 until July 2023. Numbers of online resource views on AusCAPPS were analysed descriptively and text from participant posts underwent qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: In mid-2023 AusCAPPS had 1911 members: 1133 (59%) GPs, 439 (23%) pharmacists and 272 (14%) nurses. Concise point-of-care documents were the most frequently viewed resource type. Of the 655 posts, most were created by GPs (532, 81.2%), followed by nurses (88, 13.4%) then pharmacists (16, 2.4%). GPs most commonly posted about clinical issues (263, 49% of GP posts). Nurses posted most frequently about service implementation (24, 27% of nurse posts). Pharmacists posted most about health system and regulatory issues (7, 44% of pharmacist posts). CONCLUSIONS: GPs, nurses and pharmacists each have professional needs for peer support and resources to initiate or continue LARC and EMA care, with GPs in particular seeking further clinical education and upskilling. Development of resources, training and implementation support may improve LARC and EMA provision in Australian primary care.

Utilising HealthPathways to understand the availability of public abortion in Australia.

BACKGROUND: Access to publiclyfunded abortion in Australia is limited, with a considerable proportion carried out by private providers. There are no nationally reported data on public abortion services, and referral pathways are poorly coordinated between hospital and primary care sectors. HealthPathways is an online system for use in primary care that provides information on referral pathways to local services. The aim of this study was to describe abortion referral pathways for each HealthPathways portal in Australia. METHODS: A review of Australian HealthPathways content on abortion was undertaken between January and June 2022. For each HealthPathways portal, data were extracted on referral options to abortion services. RESULTS: Overall, 17 out of 34 Australian HealthPathways consented to be included. Nearly half (47%) had no public services listed for surgical abortion, and 35% had no public services for medical abortion. The majority (64% for surgical abortion, 67% for medical abortion) emphasised that public services should be considered only as a last resort. There was variation in information regarding gestation-specific options, the time-critical nature of referrals, and the importance of women's own preference when deciding between medical or surgical abortion. CONCLUSION: Despite few remaining legal restrictions to abortion, many regions across Australia either do not have public abortion services or do not provide information about them. There is an urgent need for transparency around public abortion service availability, clear guidelines to support referral pathways, and commitment from State and Federal governments to expand the availability of accessible, no-cost abortion in Australia.

Effectiveness of preconception interventions in primary care: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Primary care-based preconception care (PCC) has the potential to improve pregnancy outcomes, but the effectiveness is unclear. AIM: To evaluate the effectiveness of primary care-based PCC delivered to reproductive-aged females and/or males to improve health knowledge, reduce preconception risk factors, and improve pregnancy outcomes. DESIGN AND SETTING: A systematic review of primary care-based PCC. METHOD: Ovid MEDLINE, Cochrane CENTRAL, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and CINAHL were searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published between July 1999 and May 2021. Two reviewers independently evaluated article eligibility and quality. RESULTS: Twenty-eight articles reporting on 22 RCTs were included. All but one focused on females. Interventions included brief education (single session) (n = 8), intensive education (multiple sessions) (n = 9), supplementary medication (n = 7), and dietary modification (n = 4). Brief education improved health knowledge in females (n = 3) and males (n = 1), reduced alcohol/tobacco consumption (n = 2), and increased folate intake (n = 3). Intensive education reduced spontaneous pregnancy loss (n = 1), alcohol-exposed pregnancies (n = 2), and increased physical activity (n = 2). Supplementary medication increased folate intake (n = 4) and dietary modification reduced pre-eclampsia (n = 1) and increased birth weight (n = 1). Only eight articles reported on pregnancy outcomes, with a range of interventions used; of these, four reported improvements in pregnancy outcomes. Most RCTs were of low quality (n = 12). CONCLUSION: Primary care-based PCC including brief and intensive education, supplementary medication, and dietary modification are effective in improving health knowledge and reducing preconception risk factors in females, although there is limited evidence for males. Further research is required to determine whether primary care-based PCC can improve pregnancy outcomes.

Effectiveness of preconception care interventions in primary care: a systematic review protocol.

BACKGROUND: Pregnancy outcomes can be adversely affected by a range of modifiable risk factors, including alcohol consumption, smoking, obesity, drug use, and poor nutrition, during the preconception period. Preconception care (PCC) involves interventions that identify and seek to change behavioural, biomedical, and social risks present in reproductive-aged women and men. Primary care is well situated to offer PCC interventions but the effectiveness of these interventions is not clear. AIM: To evaluate the effectiveness of primary care-based PCC delivered to reproductive-aged women and/or men to improve health knowledge, reduce preconception risk factors, and improve pregnancy outcomes. DESIGN & SETTING: A systematic review of primary care-based PCC. METHOD: Ovid MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) databases will be searched for English language studies published between July 1999 and May 2021. For inclusion, the PCC intervention must be provided in a primary care setting and intervention recipients must be reproductive-aged women and/or men. All stages of screening and data extraction will involve a dual review. The Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 (RoB 2) for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) will be used to assess the methodological quality of studies. This protocol adheres to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols (PRISMA-P) reporting guidelines. CONCLUSION: Findings will determine the effectiveness of primary care-based preconception interventions delivered to reproductive-aged women and men on improving health knowledge, reducing risk factors, and improving pregnancy outcomes. Findings will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.

The Chondrogenic Potential of First-Trimester and Term Placental Mesenchymal Stem/Stromal Cells.

OBJECTIVES: Mesenchymal stem/stromal cells (MSCs) are a well-established cell source for cartilage engineering, but challenges remain as differentiation often results in chondrocyte hypertrophy. Chondrogenic potential also varies with MSC source and donor age. We assessed the chondrogenic potential of first-trimester and term placental MSCs and compared their response to commonly used bone marrow MSCs (BM-MSCs). DESIGN: MSCs were isolated from first-trimester and term placentae. BM-MSCs were commercially obtained. Chondrogenesis was induced by micromass culture in commercial chondrogenic media for 7, 14, or 21 days. Pellets were assessed for glycosaminoglycan (GAG) content, and types I, II, and X collagen. Gene expression was profiled using Qiagen RT2 human MSC arrays. RESULTS: At day 0, first-trimester and term MSCs expression levels of many chondrogenic genes to BM-MSC after 21 days of culture. Only first trimester MSCs showed significant changes in chondrogenic gene expression during induction compared to day 0 undifferentiated MSCs (greater BMP4, KAT2B, and reduced GDF6 expression). Additionally, first-trimester MSCs showed significantly greater expression of ABCB1 (at days 14 and 21) and BMP4 (at days 7, 14, 21) compared with term MSCs. Both first-trimester and term pellets showed increased GAG content over time and term MSCs had significantly GAG greater compared with BM-MSCs at days 7 and 14. Type II collagen was present in all pellets but unlike BM-MSCs, type I collagen was not observed in first-trimester or term MSC pellets. CONCLUSIONS: These data highlight differences in BM-MSC and placental MSC chondrogenesis and demonstrate that placental MSCs may be an alternative cell source.

Exploring the gray areas between "stealthing" and reproductive coercion and abuse.

The aim of this qualitative study was to understand and differentiate between women's experiences of "stealthing" (non-consensual condom removal) and reproductive coercion and abuse (RCA) which is defined as any deliberate attempt to control a woman's reproductive choices or interfere with her reproductive autonomy. These two experiences are often conflated within the literature, yet little is known about whether this understanding reflects women's lived reality. We recruited female participants from a large Australian metropolitan hospital who self-identified as having experienced a partner interfering with contraception or trying to force them to get pregnant or end a pregnancy against their wishes. Fourteen women (predominantly white, educated and employed) participated in an in-depth interview. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and a process of thematic narrative analysis was undertaken, focusing on the meanings women assigned to their experiences and the differences and similarities across the stories. Analysis revealed that stories about stealthing were characterized by disrespect and selfishness, whereas RCA stories highlighted control with intent. The concepts of intent and control can therefore be understood as central to defining RCA and differentiating it from stealthing. It seems likely that stealthing is primarily a form of sexual violence, as it lacks the specific reproductive intent that characterizes RCA. These findings have important implications for how RCA and stealthing are addressed and measured in research and responded to in practice.

Women's expectations of healthcare providers in the context of reproductive abuse in Australia.

Reproductive abuse is a poorly understood form of violence against women. It is defined as a deliberate attempt to interfere with or control a women's reproductive choices and is usually perpetrated by a male intimate partner. Reproductive abuse is associated with a range of poor health outcomes for women, increasing the likelihood that they will visit a healthcare provider. Despite this, there is a dearth of evidence to inform best practice in health settings, particularly research that highlights the voices of survivors. Qualitative studies to date have focused on intimate partner or sexual violence more broadly, yet it is likely that reproductive abuse presents its own nuance in terms of a supportive response. In this paper, we address this gap by reporting qualitative data from 14 women who self-identified as survivors of reproductive abuse. Findings suggest that healthcare providers have an important role to play in responding to reproductive abuse, focusing on taking the problem seriously, reinforcing that the behaviour is wrong, asking about other forms of violence and addressing women's needs and priorities for contraception and reproductive autonomy. This study has important implications for the development of best practice guidelines for healthcare providers responding to reproductive abuse in female patients.