Waiting to start abortion: A qualitative exploration of narratives of waiting shared in a Reddit community for abortion post-Dobbs leak in 2022.

With the Dobbs leak introducing uncertainty about access and the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision in June of 2022 overturning the US constitutional right to abortion, delays in accessing desired abortion care are likely growing longer and more common. Timely research on people's experiences waiting to access abortion care is needed. Using data from an abortion subreddit (r/abortion), we analyzed posts that described waiting after having decided to terminate the pregnancy, either by having an in-clinic appointment or ordering medication(s) online for self-managed abortion. Our analysis explored described 1) wait time length, 2) factors contributing to waiting, and 3) impacts of waiting. We used a hybrid inductive and deductive thematic qualitative coding approach to analyze a month-stratified 10% random sample of posts to the r/abortion community in 2022 surrounding the Dobbs leak and decision (May-December, n = 523 posts). Among posts to r/abortion that described waiting to start an abortion (n = 80), wait times ranged from one day to more than a month. Lack of appointment availability and waiting for mailed medications were commonly described as causing delays in accessing in-clinic abortion care and self-managed abortion, respectively. People shared challenges with pregnancy symptoms and feelings of anxiety, fear, isolation, and uncertainty. Posters also commonly described needing additional support while waiting. Overall, waiting to start an abortion was extremely stressful and isolating., with people often waiting weeks between ordering medication or scheduling an appointment and initiating the abortion process. Experiences of waiting to start an abortion and their impacts are of increasing concern as abortion access is further restricted. Additional targeted information and support are needed to mitigate these challenges. Providing timely access is imperative to quality care and overall abortion experiences.

Deception by obfuscation: Studnicki et al.'s retracted longitudinal cohort study of emergency room utilization following abortion.

OBJECTIVES: In November 2022, the anti-abortion advocacy group Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Food and Drug Administration challenging the initial 2000 approval of mifepristone and its subsequent approvals, which removed unnecessary restrictions on its use, by disputing the medication's safety record. Such challenges relied on a study examining the incidence of emergency room visits following medication abortion with mifepristone and procedural abortion using Medicaid claims data from 1999-2015. In February 2024 that study was retracted by its publisher. In this paper, we analyzed the methods and presentations of the data used in the study. STUDY DESIGN: We drew upon commonly accepted principles in responsible epidemiologic and scientific research to evaluate the methods and presentations of the data and organized our findings into themes. RESULTS: We found multiple instances of methodological flaws, mischaracterizations, and obfuscations of data in this study, including use of a misleading research question and framing, analytic flaws, inappropriate use of an unvalidated proxy measure for outcomes of interest, and inappropriate and deceptive visualizations of data. In each instance, the resulting effect obfuscated and misrepresented the safety of medication abortion with mifepristone. CONCLUSIONS: The misrepresentation and exaggeration of data promoted and exacerbated misinterpretations about the study's findings, resulting in substantial harm before it was retracted. Recognizing that ongoing judicial proceedings threaten access to conventional reproductive health care in the United States, public health policies must be informed by scientific and medical literature that is comprehensive, methodologically sound, and absent any obfuscations or misrepresentations. IMPLICATIONS: Studnicki et al.'s study of emergency room visits after abortion misrepresented the safety of mifepristone with multiple instances of methodological flaws and obfuscations of data. While the study has now been retracted, it led to irrevocable harm, threatening access to medication abortion, which has an established safety record.

Effectiveness and safety of telehealth medication abortion in the USA.

Telehealth abortion has become critical to addressing surges in demand in states where abortion remains legal but evidence on its effectiveness and safety is limited. California Home Abortion by Telehealth (CHAT) is a prospective study that follows pregnant people who obtained medication abortion via telehealth from three virtual clinics operating in 20 states and Washington, DC between April 2021 and January 2022. Individuals were screened using a standardized no-test protocol, primarily relying on their medical history to assess medical eligibility. We assessed effectiveness, defined as complete abortion after 200 mg mifepristone and 1,600 µg misoprostol (or lower) without additional intervention; safety was measured by the absence of serious adverse events. We estimated rates using multivariable logistic regression and multiple imputation to account for missing data. Among 6,034 abortions, 97.7% (95% confidence interval (CI) = 97.2-98.1%) were complete without subsequent known intervention or ongoing pregnancy after the initial treatment. Overall, 99.8% (99.6-99.9%) of abortions were not followed by serious adverse events. In total, 0.25% of patients experienced a serious abortion-related adverse event, 0.16% were treated for an ectopic pregnancy and 1.3% abortions were followed by emergency department visits. There were no differences in effectiveness or safety between synchronous and asynchronous models of care. Telehealth medication abortion is effective, safe and comparable to published rates of in-person medication abortion care.

Patient Acceptability of Telehealth Medication Abortion Care in the United States, 2021‒2022: A Cohort Study.

Objectives. Despite the recent expansion of direct-to-patient telehealth abortion care in the United States, patient experiences with the service are not well understood. Methods. We described care experiences of 1600 telehealth abortion patients in 2021 to 2022 and used logistic regression to explore differences by race or ethnicity and between synchronous (phone or video) and asynchronous (secure messaging) telehealth abortion care. Results. Most patients trusted the provider (98%), felt telehealth was the right decision (96%), felt cared for (92%), and were very satisfied (89%). Patients most commonly cited privacy (76%), timeliness (74%), and staying at home (71%) as benefits. The most commonly reported drawback was initial uncertainty about whether the service was legitimate (38%). Asian patients were less likely to be very satisfied than White patients (79% vs 90%; P = .008). Acceptability was high for both synchronous and asynchronous care. Conclusions. Telehealth abortion care is highly acceptable, and benefits include privacy and expediency. Public Health Implications. Telehealth abortion can expand abortion access in an increasingly restricted landscape while maintaining patient-centered care. (Am J Public Health. 2024;114(2):241-250. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2023.307437).

Potential demand for and access to medication abortion among North Carolina college students.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate demand for medication abortion (MAB) among North Carolina (NC) college students and describe access to nearest clinics offering MAB to each campus. METHODS: We calculated demand using 2019-2020 campus demographics and NC abortion statistics. We used a mystery client technique to gather MAB cost and appointment wait times at the closest clinics and calculated travel distances and times. RESULTS: We estimated that 2,517 NC students seek MAB annually. Twenty-one clinics were closest to NC's 111 colleges and universities, including five in neighboring states. Mean cost was $450, with an average wait time of six days to appointment. The average round-trip travel distance was 58 miles and time to the nearest clinic was 84 min by car. CONCLUSIONS: Many NC college students likely obtain MAB every year and face high costs, long wait times and distances to care, which has likely worsened after the overturning of Roe v. Wade.

Separating Procedure-related Fears From Future Fertility Concerns Among a Cohort Seeking Abortion Information Online.

INTRODUCTION: The general public and abortion patients in the United States have misinformation about the risks of infertility associated with abortion, which may influence abortion care-seeking. METHODS: The Google Ads Abortion Access Study was a national study of people considering abortion and searching online for information. Participants completed baseline and follow-up surveys, providing free text responses to questions about barriers and facilitators to abortion. We conducted an exploratory analysis of the free text responses related to fertility and used thematic analysis to identify concerns raised about links between abortion and future fertility. RESULTS: Of 864 participants who provided free text responses in the follow-up survey, 32 specifically mentioned fertility. Few expressed fear that complications from the abortion procedure would somehow lead to infertility; rather, most discussed complex and overlapping thoughts about how abortion factored into their reproductive life plans. These included age-related concerns, missing out on their "chance" to have a child, fear of being punished by God with infertility for having an abortion, and conflicting emotions if they had previously been told they were subfecund or infertile. CONCLUSION: Although previous research has focused on misinformation about the link between abortion and infertility, participants in this study rarely mentioned it as a concern. Researchers and practitioners should be attuned to the distinctions people make between infertility occurring as a result of abortion and other fears they might have about not achieving their future reproductive aspirations, ask questions, and provide counseling accordingly.

The Role of Telehealth in Promoting Equitable Abortion Access in the United States: Spatial Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Even preceding the Supreme Court's 2022 Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization decision, patients in the United States faced exceptional barriers to reach abortion providers. Abortion restrictions disproportionately limited abortion access among people of color, young people, and those living on low incomes. Presently, clinics in states where abortion remains legal are experiencing an influx of out-of-state patients and wait times for in-person appointments are increasing. Direct-to-patient telehealth for abortion care has expanded since its introduction in the United States in 2020. However, the role of this telehealth model in addressing geographic barriers to and inequities in abortion access remains unclear. OBJECTIVE: We sought to examine the amount of travel that patients averted by using telehealth for abortion care, and the role of telehealth in mitigating inequities in abortion access by race or ethnicity, age, pregnancy duration, socioeconomic status, rural residence, and distance to a facility. METHODS: We used geospatial analyses and data from patients in the California Home Abortion by Telehealth Study, residing in 31 states and Washington DC, who obtained telehealth abortion care at 1 of 3 virtual abortion clinics. We used patients' residential ZIP code data and data from US abortion facility locations to document the round-trip driving distance in miles, driving time, and public transit time to the nearest abortion facility that patients averted by using telehealth abortion services from April 2021 to January 2022, before the Dobbs decision. We used binomial regression to assess whether patients reported that telehealth was more likely to make it possible to access a timely abortion among patients of color, those experiencing food insecurity, younger patients, those with longer pregnancy durations, rural patients, and those residing further from their closest abortion facility. RESULTS: The 6027 patients averted a median of 10 (IQR 5-26) miles and 25 (IQR 14-46) minutes of round-trip driving, and 1 hour 25 minutes (IQR 46 minutes to 2 hours 30 minutes) of round-trip public transit time. Among a subsample of 1586 patients surveyed, 43% (n=683) reported that telehealth made it possible to obtain timely abortion care. Telehealth was most likely to make it possible to have a timely abortion for younger patients (prevalence ratio [PR] 1.4, 95% CI 1.2-1.6) for patients younger than 25 years of age compared to those 35 years of age or older), rural patients (PR 1.4, 95% CI 1.2-1.6), those experiencing food insecurity (PR 1.3, 95% CI 1.1-1.4), and those who averted over 100 miles of driving to their closest abortion facility (PR 1.6, 95% CI 1.3-1.9). CONCLUSIONS: These findings support the role of telehealth in reducing abortion-related travel barriers in states where abortion remains legal, especially among patient populations who already face structural barriers to abortion care. Restrictions on telehealth abortion threaten health equity.

Adaptation of the sexual and reproductive empowerment scale for adolescents and young adults in Kenya.

Measuring empowerment is critical to understanding the level of control adolescents and young adults (AYA) have over their sexual and reproductive health (SRH) behaviors, and could provide a key window into addressing their unique SRH needs. We adapted the Sexual and Reproductive Empowerment (SRE) scale for AYA for use in an East African context. This multi-method qualitative study sampled 15-23 year-old female adolescents and young adults in Kisumu, Kenya. We conducted in-depth interviews (n = 30) and analyzed transcripts with an inductive, constant comparison approach. Empowerment domains were integrated with Kabeer's (1999) framework in a conceptual model, which we referenced to revise the original and develop new scale items. Items underwent expert review, and were condensed and translated through team-based consensus-building. We evaluated content validity in cognitive interviews (n = 25), during which item phrasing and word choice were revised to generate an adapted SRE scale. Participants (n = 55) had a median age of 18 (range 16-23), and 75% were under 19 years. We categorize three types of adaptations to the SRE scale: new item generation, item revision, and translation/linguistic considerations. We developed nine new items reflecting AYA's experiences and new domains of empowerment that emerged from the data; new domains relate to self-efficacy in accessing sexual and reproductive health care, and how material needs are met. All items were revised and translated to echo concepts and language relevant to participants, navigating the multilingualism common in many African countries. Centering the voices of female Kenyan AYA, this study provides insight into measuring the latent construct of adolescent sexual and reproductive empowerment in an East African setting, and supports the adapted SRE scale's content validity for Kenya. We detail our multi-method, theory-driven approach, contributing to limited methods guidance for measure adaptation across contexts and among diverse adolescent populations.

Awareness of medication abortion among a nationally representative U.S. sample, 2021-2022.

OBJECTIVES: Assess public awareness of medication abortion in the U.S. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a cross-sectional survey in 2021-2022 with a probability-based sample, calculating the prevalence of medication abortion awareness and assessing its associations with participant characteristics using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 45% of adults (7201/16,113) and 49% of eligible 15-17-year-old females (175/358) invited completed the survey. In all, 64% of 6992 participants assigned female at birth, and 57% of 360 participants assigned male reported awareness of medication abortion. Race, age, education, poverty level, religion, sexual identity, abortion history, and attitudes toward abortion legality were associated with differences in awareness. CONCLUSIONS: Medication abortion awareness differs by participant groups and is critical for expanding abortion access. IMPLICATIONS: Tailored health information for groups with less awareness of medication abortion may help spread knowledge of the method and how to access it.

Impact of Sumadhur intervention on fertility and family planning decision-making norms: a mixed methods study.

BACKGROUND: Mindful of social norms shaping health among women pressured to prove early fertility in Nepal, a bi-national research team developed and piloted a 4-month intervention engaging household triads (newly married women, their husbands, and mothers-in-law) toward advancing gender equity, personal agency, and reproductive health. This study evaluates the impact on family planning and fertility decision-making. METHODS: In 2021, Sumadhur was piloted in six villages with 30 household triads (90 participants). Pre/post surveys of all participants were analyzed using paired sample nonparametric tests and in-depth interviews with a subset of 45 participants were transcribed and analyzed thematically. RESULTS: Sumadhur significantly impacted (p < .05) norms related to pregnancy spacing and timing, and sex preference of children, as well as knowledge about family planning benefits, pregnancy prevention methods, and abortion legality. Family planning intent also increased among newly married women. Qualitative findings revealed improved family dynamics and gender equity, and shed light on remaining challenges. CONCLUSIONS: Entrenched social norms surrounding fertility and family planning contrasted with participants' personal beliefs, highlighting needed community-level shifts to improve reproductive health in Nepal. Engagement of influential community- and family-members is key to improving norms and reproductive health. Additionally, promising interventions such as Sumadhur should be scaled up and reassessed.

Societal norms are among the key influencers that shape the decisions that people make about their desired family size and the methods they will apply to achieve it. To support women in Nepal, where norms are often layered upon the expectation that women will prove their fertility soon after marriage, a bi-national research team developed and piloted a 4-month intervention, Sumadhur, engaging newly married women, their husbands, and mothers-in-law. This study evaluated the impact the Sumadhur had on norms, knowledge, and intent related to family planning. From pre- and post-questionnaires, we found norms significantly shifted and knowledge significantly improved among all participant groups as a result of participating in Sumadhur. From interviews following the intervention, we found that family dynamics and gender equity also improved despite lingering challenges including unchanged norms about the expected timing of a couple's first child. Our results confirmed that it is critical to engage influential community and family members in improving norms and supporting women to make decisions about their reproduction. Additionally, promising interventions like Sumadhur should be scaled up and re-evaluated.

Mailing abortion pills does not delay care: A cohort study comparing mailed to in-person dispensing of abortion medications in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: Given the substantial barriers to abortion access in the United States, many clinics now mail patients abortion medications. We examined whether dispensing the medications by mail prolonged time to medication use. STUDY DESIGN: We analyzed data from no-test medication abortions with medication provided either by mail or in a clinic from 11 United States clinics from February 2020 to January 2021. We examined mean number of days from patients' first contact with the clinic to mifepristone ingestion, its two-component intervals (first contact to medication dispensing and dispensing to mifepristone ingestion), and pregnancy duration at mifepristone ingestion. We used Poisson regression to compare mean outcomes across three dispensing methods: in-person, mailed from the clinic, and mailed from a mail-order pharmacy. RESULTS: Among the 2600 records, patients took mifepristone on average at 49 days of gestation (95% CI, 47-51) and 7 days (95% CI, 4-10) after first contact. Mean time from first contact to mifepristone ingestion was 6 days when medications were dispensed in-person and 9 days when mailed (p = 0.38). While time from first contact to dispensing was similar across methods (6 days in-person, 5 days mailed, p = 0.77), more time elapsed from dispensing to mifepristone ingestion when medications were mailed (4 days from clinic, 5 days from mail-order pharmacy) versus dispensed in-person (0.3 days, p < 0.001). Time to mifepristone ingestion was shorter with higher pregnancy duration. Pregnancy duration at ingestion was similar across methods (48 days in-person, 50 days mailed). CONCLUSIONS: Mailing medications did not significantly prolong time from patients' first contact with the clinic to mifepristone ingestion or increase pregnancy duration at mifepristone ingestion. IMPLICATIONS: Abortion providers should offer a range of medication abortion dispensing options, prioritizing patient preference.

Fear of procedure and pain in individuals considering abortion: A qualitative study.

OBJECTIVES: To explore concerns about procedural abortion and abortion-related pain in a cohort searching for abortion online. METHODS: The Google Ads Abortion Access Study was a national longitudinal cohort study that recruited people searching for abortion online. Participants completed a baseline demographic survey and a follow-up survey four weeks later evaluating barriers and facilitators to abortion. This qualitative study utilized thematic analysis to produce a descriptive narrative based on overarching themes about procedural abortion and abortion-related pain. RESULTS: There were 57 separate mentions from 45 participants regarding procedural abortion or abortion-related pain. We identified two main themes: 1) concerns about the procedure (with subthemes, fear of procedural abortion, comparison to medication abortion, lack of sedation) and 2) abortion-related pain (with subthemes fear of abortion-related pain, experiences of pain, fear of complications and cost-barriers to pain control). CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the need for improved anticipatory guidance and accessible resources to assuage potential fears and misconceptions regarding abortion. PRACTICE IMPLIACTIONS: Abortion resources, particularly online, should provide accurate and unbiased information about abortion methods and pain to help patients feel more prepared. Providers should be aware of potential concerns surrounding procedural abortion and pain when counseling patients presenting for care.

Intimate relationships after receiving versus being denied an abortion: A 5-year prospective study in the United States.

CONTEXT: When an individual seeking an abortion cannot obtain one, carrying that pregnancy to term may affect both her relationship with the man involved in the pregnancy and her prospects for new intimate relationships. We aimed to assess the impact of receiving versus being denied a wanted abortion on women's intimate relationships, up to 5 years after seeking an abortion in the United States. METHODS: Using mixed-effects regression models, we compared relationship outcomes among women who presented for abortion care just under facilities' gestational age limits ("Near-limit abortion patients," n = 452) with those who presented just over, were denied an abortion ("Turnaways," n = 146) at 30 US facilities. RESULTS: At 1 week post-abortion seeking, the predicted probability of being in a relationship with the man involved in the pregnancy was 58%, gradually declining to 27% at 5 years with no significant differences between those who received and those who were denied an abortion. However, from 2 to 5 years post-abortion seeking, participants who were denied an abortion had double the odds (aOR = 2.01, 95% CI: 1.09-3.69) of being in a poor intimate relationship, with a predicted probability of being in a poor relationship of 14% among those denied an abortion compared with 9% among those who received one (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Carrying an unwanted pregnancy to term does not increase the chance of being in an intimate relationship with the man involved in the pregnancy but may have negative implications for the quality of future relationships up to 5 years post-abortion seeking.

Estimated Travel Time and Spatial Access to Abortion Facilities in the US Before and After the Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Decision.

Importance: Abortion facility closures resulted in a substantial decrease in access to abortion care in the US. Objectives: To investigate the changes in travel time to the nearest abortion facility after the Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization (referred to hereafter as Dobbs) US Supreme Court decision. Design, Setting, and Participants: Repeated cross-sectional spatial analysis of travel time from each census tract in the contiguous US (n = 82 993) to the nearest abortion facility (n = 1134) listed in the Advancing New Standards in Reproductive Health database. Census tract boundaries and demographics were defined by the 2020 American Community Survey. The spatial analysis compared access during the pre-Dobbs period (January-December 2021) with the post-Dobbs period (September 2022) for the estimated 63 718 431 females aged 15 to 44 years (reproductive age for this analysis) in the US (excluding Alaska and Hawaii). Exposures: The Dobbs ruling and subsequent state laws restricting abortion procedures. The pre-Dobbs period measured abortion access to all facilities providing abortions in 2021. Post-Dobbs abortion access was measured by simulating the closure of all facilities in the 15 states with existing total or 6-week abortion bans in effect as of September 30, 2022. Main Outcomes and Measures: Median and mean changes in surface travel time (eg, car, public transportation) to an abortion facility in the post-Dobbs period compared with the pre-Dobbs period and the total percentage of females of reproductive age living more than 60 minutes from abortion facilities during the pre- and post-Dobbs periods. Results: Of 1134 abortion facilities in the US (at least 1 in every state; 8 in Alaska and Hawaii excluded), 749 were considered active during the pre-Dobbs period and 671 were considered active during a simulated post-Dobbs period. Median (IQR) and mean (SD) travel times to pre-Dobbs abortion facilities were estimated to be 10.9 (4.3-32.4) and 27.8 (42.0) minutes. Travel time to abortion facilities in the post-Dobbs period significantly increased (paired sample t test P <.001) to an estimated median (IQR) of 17.0 (4.9-124.5) minutes and a mean (SD) of and 100.4 (161.5) minutes. In the post-Dobbs period, an estimated 33.3% (sensitivity interval, 32.3%-34.8%) of females of reproductive age lived in a census tract more than 60 minutes from an abortion facility compared with 14.6.% (sensitivity interval, 13.0%-16.9%) of females of reproductive age in the pre-Dobbs period. Conclusions and Relevance: In this repeated cross-sectional spatial analysis, estimated travel time to abortion facilities in the US was significantly greater in the post-Dobbs period after accounting for the closure of abortion facilities in states with total or 6-week abortion bans compared with the pre-Dobbs period, during which all facilities providing abortions in 2021 were considered active.

Improving our estimates: assessing misclassification of abortion accessibility in the United States.

PURPOSE: Quantify the misclassification of abortion accessibility resulting from calculations based on block groups, census tracts, ZCTAs, or counties versus census blocks. METHODS: We included 850 facilities from the 2018 ANSIRH Facility Database and Planned Parenthood website. Accessibility was the proportions of 18-44 year-old women living within a 30-, 60-, and 90-minute drive from an abortion-providing facility. We calculated accessibility using five different geographic units: census blocks, block groups, census tracts, ZCTAs, and counties. We estimated the potential magnitude of abortion accessibility misclassification resulting by calculating the difference between accessibility calculated using each geographic unit, respectively, for each drive time as compared to census blocks. RESULTS: In this analysis, counties, the largest geographic unit considered, underestimated national abortion accessibility compared with census blocks by up to 24.21 percentage points; while block group-, census tract, or ZCTA-based national estimates of abortion accessibility in the US resulted in small underestimates relative to estimates constructed using census blocks. CONCLUSIONS: Studies of population accessibility should use the smallest feasible geographic unit of analysis. While this study focused on abortion accessibility, our findings likely apply to other health services, particularly those with distributions like abortion care.