Importance of abortion training to United States Obstetrics and Gynecology residency applicants in 2023.

OBJECTIVE: Nearly half of obstetrics and gynecology (OB/GYN) residency programs in the United States lost access to local training in abortion care following the 2022 Dobbs v Jackson Supreme Court decision. We aimed to determine whether OB/GYN residency candidates who desire abortion training apply to programs in states where abortion is restricted/banned. STUDY DESIGN: In 2023, we conducted an anonymous electronic survey of residency interviewees at three large academic OB/GYN programs about the importance of various program characteristics in their selection process. We chose to represent both very restrictive and protective environments for abortion care. We stratified respondents by importance of abortion training in applying to programs (essential or very important [high preference group] versus moderately, slightly, or not important [low preference group]). RESULTS: We analyzed 175 completed surveys (response rate 56%). Of 175 respondents, most (n=115, 66%) stated that access to abortion training was essential (33%) or very important (33%) when applying to programs. Both high preference group (82%) and low preference group respondents (98%) applied in states where abortion is banned or restricted. Respondents applied in banned/restricted states due to geography, concern about applying to too few programs, and expectation that the program would provide out-of-state training nonetheless. CONCLUSION: The majority of survey respondents who reported that access to abortion training during residency is essential or very important applied to programs where abortion training is not locally available. Most of these applicants expected programs in restricted states to provide training regardless. IMPLICATIONS: Residency programs should be aware of the importance of abortion training to applicants, as well as abortion training expectations, and work to develop opportunities and strengthen training networks in abortion care to meet candidates' needs and ensure adequate learning opportunities exist for all.

Abortion patients' decision making about where to obtain out-of-state care following Texas' 2021 abortion ban.

OBJECTIVE: To assess pregnant Texans' decisions about where to obtain out-of-state abortion care following the September 2021 implementation of Senate Bill 8 (SB8), which prohibited abortions after detectable embryonic cardiac activity. DATA SOURCE: In-depth telephone interviews with Texas residents ≥15 years of age who obtained out-of-state abortion care after SB8's implementation. STUDY DESIGN: This qualitative study explored participants' experiences identifying and contacting abortion facilities and their concerns and considerations about traveling out of state. We used inductive and deductive codes in our thematic analysis describing people's decisions about where to obtain care and how they evaluated available options. DATA COLLECTION: Texas residents self-referred to the study from flyers we provided to abortion facilities in Arkansas, Colorado, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, New Mexico, and Oklahoma. We also enrolled participants from a concurrent online survey of Texans seeking abortion care. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Participants (n = 65) frequently obtained referral lists for out-of-state locations from health-care providers, and a few received referrals to specific facilities; however, referrals rarely included the information people needed to decide where to obtain care. More than half of the participants prioritized getting the soonest appointment and often contacted multiple locations and traveled further to do so; others who could not travel further typically waited longer for an appointment. Although the participants rarely cited state abortion restrictions or cost of care as their main reason for choosing a location, they often made sacrifices to lessen the logistical and economic hardships that state restrictions and out-of-state travel costs created. Informative abortion facility websites and compassionate scheduling staff solidified some participants' facility choice. CONCLUSIONS: Pregnant Texans made difficult trade-offs and experienced travel-related burdens to obtain out-of-state abortion care. As abortion bans prohibit more people from obtaining in-state care, efforts to strengthen patient navigation are needed to reduce care-seeking burdens as this will support people's reproductive autonomy.

Access to care following Planned Parenthood's termination from Texas' Medicaid network: A qualitative study.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to explore Planned Parenthood Medicaid patients' experiences getting reproductive health care in Texas after the state terminated Planned Parenthood providers from its Medicaid program in 2021. STUDY DESIGN: Between January and September 2021, we recruited Medicaid patients who obtained care at Planned Parenthood health centers prior to the state termination using direct mailers, electronic messages, community outreach, and flyers in health centers. We conducted baseline and 2-month follow-up semistructured phone interviews about patients' previous experiences using Medicaid at Planned Parenthood and other providers and how the termination affected their care. We qualitatively analyzed the data using the principles of grounded theory. RESULTS: We interviewed 30 patients, 24 of whom completed follow-up interviews. Participants reported that Planned Parenthood reliably accepted different Medicaid plans, worked with patients to ameliorate the structural barriers they face to care, and referred them to other providers as needed. After Planned Parenthood's termination from the Texas Medicaid program, participants faced difficulties accessing care elsewhere, including same-day appointments and on-site medications. Consequences included delayed or forgone reproductive health care, including contraception, and emotional distress. CONCLUSIONS: Planned Parenthood Medicaid patients found it difficult to connect with other providers for reproductive health care and to obtain evidence-based care following the organization's termination from Medicaid. Ensuring all Medicaid patients have freedom to choose providers would improve access to quality contraception and other reproductive health care. IMPLICATIONS: Medicaid-funded reproductive health care access is restricted for people living on low incomes when providers do not reliably accept all Medicaid plans or cannot participate in Medicaid. This situation can lead to lower quality care, delayed or forgone care, and emotional distress.

Abortion Access and Medically Complex Pregnancies Before and After Texas Senate Bill 8.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate how Texas health care professionals who care for patients experiencing medically complex pregnancies navigate abortion restrictions. METHODS: We conducted qualitative in-depth interviews with health care professionals across Texas who cared for patients with life-limiting fetal diagnoses or who had existing or developed health conditions that adversely affected pregnancy. We conducted the first round of interviews March-June 2021 and the second round of interviews January-May 2022 after the implementation of Texas Senate Bill 8 (SB8), which prohibited most abortions after detection of embryonic cardiac activity. We used inductive and deductive qualitative analysis to identify themes and changes in practice after the implementation of SB8. RESULTS: We conducted a total of 50 interviews: 25 before implementation of SB8 and 25 after the law's implementation. We interviewed 21 maternal-fetal medicine specialists, 19 obstetrician-gynecologists, eight physicians whose primary practice is the provision of abortion care, and two genetic counselors. Participants reported presenting their patients with information about health risks and outcomes of continued pregnancy in each policy period; however, counseling on these options was curtailed after implementation of SB8. Even in cases in which a patient's health and, in some cases, life would be compromised, narrow criteria for abortions at hospitals limited care before implementation of SB8, and criteria often became more stringent after implementation of SB8. Administrative approval processes and referrals for abortion delayed care and endangered patients' health, which worsened after in-state options were eliminated after implementation of SB8. Participants noted that patients with more limited resources who were unable to travel out of state often had to continue pregnancies, further increasing their risk of morbidity. CONCLUSION: Texas health care professionals' abilities to provide evidence-based abortion care to patients with medically complex pregnancies were constrained by institutional policies, and care options narrowed further after implementation of SB8. Abortion restrictions limit shared decision making, compromise patient care, and put pregnant people's health at risk.

New Gaps and Urgent Needs in Graduate Medical Education and Training in Abortion.

Abortion is essential health care, and abortion training and education are essential at all levels of medical education. Among the most common procedures performed in obstetrics and gynecology (OB/GYN), abortion is a core competency for OB/GYN residency programs. For nearly 50 years, the procedure was federally protected by the U.S. Supreme Court's January 22, 1973, Roe v Wade decision. On June 24, 2022, amidst increasing state restrictions limiting abortion access, the Court's decision on Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization effectively reversed Roe . As a result, immediate bans on abortion went into effect across the country, removing access to abortion for millions of people and newly limiting training and education in this core competency for many medical residents. As of June 2022, nearly half of U.S. OB/GYN residency programs and more than 40% of residents are located in states that have banned or are likely to ban abortion. In states where abortion is restricted or illegal, states must adapt quickly to ensure their residents meet training requirements. This adaptation may include developing and leveraging relationships with programs in states where access is protected, depending on simulation, and placing greater emphasis on education and training in pregnancy loss management and postabortion care. None of these is a comprehensive solution and even all together, they are insufficient to train residents and medical students. Ultimately, many future physicians will not receive the training they need to provide full reproductive health care to their pregnant patients. Legal and other systems of support are needed to ensure that current and future physicians can provide compassionate, evidence-based reproductive health care, including essential abortion care.

A Pregnant Patient Presents with Leakage of Vaginal Fluid in the Second Trimester.

Leakage of Vaginal Fluid in the Second TrimesterA pregnant 43-year-old woman presented with leakage of vaginal fluid at 15 weeks of gestation. How do you approach the evaluation, and what is on your differential diagnosis?

Association of Texas' 2021 Ban on Abortion in Early Pregnancy With the Number of Facility-Based Abortions in Texas and Surrounding States.

Importance: Texas' 2021 ban on abortion in early pregnancy may demonstrate how patterns of abortion might change following the US Supreme Court's June 2022 decision overturning Roe v Wade. Objective: To assess changes in the number of abortions and changes in the percentage of out-of-state abortions among Texas residents performed at 12 or more weeks of gestation in the first 6 months following implementation of Texas Senate Bill 8 (SB 8), which prohibited abortions after detection of embryonic cardiac activity. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective study of a sample of 50 Texas and out-of-state abortion facilities using an interrupted time series analysis to assess changes in the number of abortions, and Poisson regression to assess changes in abortions at 12 or more weeks of gestation. Data included 68 820 Texas facility-based abortions and 11 287 out-of-state abortions among Texas residents during the study period from September 1, 2020, to February 28, 2022. Exposures: Abortion care obtained after (September 2021-February 2022) vs before (September 2020-August 2021) implementation of SB 8. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcomes were changes in the number of facility-based abortions for Texas residents, in Texas and out of state, in the month after implementation of SB 8 compared with the month before. The secondary outcome was the change in the percentage of out-of-state abortions among Texas residents obtained at 12 or more weeks of gestation during the 6-month period after the law's implementation. Results: Between September 2020 and August 2021, there were 55 018 abortions in Texas and 2547 out-of-state abortions among Texas residents. During the 6 months after SB 8, there were 13 802 abortions in Texas and 8740 out-of-state abortions among Texas residents. Compared with the month before implementation of SB 8, the number of Texas facility-based abortions significantly decreased from 5451 to 2169 (difference, -3282 [95% CI, -3171 to -3396]; incidence rate ratio [IRR], 0.43 [95% CI, 0.36-0.51]) in the month after SB 8 was implemented. The number of out-of-state abortions among Texas residents significantly increased from 222 to 1332 (difference, 1110 [95% CI, 1047-1177]; IRR, 5.38 [95% CI, 4.19-6.91]). Overall, the total documented number of Texas facility-based and out-of-state abortions among Texas residents significantly decreased from 5673 to 3501 (absolute change, -2172 [95% CI, -2083 to -2265]; IRR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.56-0.79]) in the first month after SB 8 was implemented compared with the previous month. Out-of-state abortions among Texas residents obtained at 12 or more weeks of gestation increased from 17.1% (221/1291) to 31.0% (399/1289) (difference, 178 [95% CI, 153-206]) during the period between September 2021 and February 2022 (P < .001 for trend). Conclusions and Relevance: Among a sample of abortion facilities, the 2021 Texas law banning abortion in early pregnancy (SB 8) was significantly associated with a decrease in the documented total of facility-based abortions in Texas and obtained by Texas residents in surrounding states in the first month after implementation compared with the previous month. Over the 6 months following SB 8 implementation, the percentage of out-of-state abortions among Texas residents obtained at 12 or more weeks of gestation significantly increased.

Society of Family Planning committee consensus on self-administration of subcutaneous depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA-SC).

Depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA) is a highly-effective, injectable contraceptive method that requires injections every 12 to 15 weeks. The need for return visits to a healthcare provider may present barriers to access, use, and continuation of DMPA. Studies demonstrate that self-administration of subcutaneous DMPA (DMPA-SC) outside clinical settings is safe, effective, feasible, acceptable, and can improve continuation. Based on existing evidence and potential to improve contraceptive access and autonomy, the Society of Family Planning recommends that DMPA-SC self-administration be made widely available as an additional option for patients. Provider-administered DMPA must also remain available to meet patients' individual needs and preferences.

Dataset: Knowledge and attitude retention following an implicit bias classroom workshop.

Background: Baylor College of Medicine provides a classroom-based implicit bias workshop to all third-year medical students to increase students' awareness of their unconscious bias and develop strategies for reducing health care disparities. The workshop meets our immediate goals and objectives. However, we are unsure if the benefit would be long-term or diminish over time. Methods: To examine the concept retention from the implicit bias classroom workshop, we administered a self-developed seven-item seven-point Likert-scale survey to our medical students at pre-, post-, and one-year post-workshop attendance. Results: The data set was comprised of survey results from two cohorts of our third and fourth-year medical students from 2018 to 2020 and included 289 completed records at three measurement points. The data included: Student Identifiers, Sex, Race/Ethnicity, Student Enrollment Type, Cohort, and three repeated measures results for each of the seven items, which were documented in wide format. The data may be of interest to those who wish to examine how factors including elapsed time, race, and sex may associate with attitudes and understandings of implicit bias following related training, and those interested in analytical methods on longitudinal research in general.

Longitudinal outcomes one year following implicit bias training in medical students.

PURPOSE: Training in implicit bias is broadly recognized as important in medical education and is mandated by some accrediting bodies. This study examined medical students' retention of concepts immediately following and one-year post participation in an implicit bias workshop. METHODS: Study subjects were 272 third-year medical students who participated in workshops held between 2018-2020 that used the Implicit Associations Test (IAT) as a trigger for discussions in small groups. We developed a survey and administered it to students to capture their awareness of implicit bias pre-, post-, and one-year post-workshop attendance. Repeated Measures Analyses and independent-samples t-tests were used to examine for differences in responses on each of the seven survey items and a tabulated 7-item average of these seven items. RESULTS: Six of seven survey items and the tabulated 7-item average examined by Repeated Measures Analyses showed statistically significant increases between the pre-, post-, and one-year post-surveys (ps range: 0.01-0.07), with a small to moderate effect sizes (ƞp2s range: 0.01-0.07). Pairwise comparisons among these three surveys' results indicated statistically significant improvements between the pre- and the post-workshop surveys (ps range: 0.01-0.03) but no statistically significant differences between the post- and the one-year post-workshop surveys (ps range: 0.57-0.99). A separate sample of 17 off-cycle students who took the one-year post- workshop survey two years after the workshop did not differ statistically on the level of awareness of bias compared to those taking the same survey one year later, as examined by the two-group independent t-tests for the seven one-year post-workshop survey items (ps range: 0.56-0.99). CONCLUSIONS: The findings support one-year retention of knowledge and attitudes gained from an implicit bias workshop and suggest similar retention at two years. Future educational interventions that train learners to recognize and manage implicit and explicit behaviors in clinical practice are needed.

Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine Consult Series #59: The use of analgesia and anesthesia for maternal-fetal procedures.

Pain is a complex phenomenon that involves more than a simple physical response to external stimuli. In maternal-fetal surgical procedures, fetal analgesia is used primarily to blunt fetal autonomic responses and minimize fetal movement. The purpose of this Consult is to review the literature on what is known about the potential for fetal awareness of pain and to discuss the indications for and the risk-benefit calculus involved in the use of fetal anesthesia and analgesia. The recommendations by the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine are as follows: (1) we suggest that fetal paralytic agents be considered in the setting of intrauterine transfusion, if needed, for the purpose of decreasing fetal movement (GRADE 2C); (2) although the fetus is unable to experience pain at the gestational age when procedures are typically performed, we suggest that opioid analgesia should be administered to the fetus during invasive fetal surgical procedures to attenuate acute autonomic responses that may be deleterious, avoid long-term consequences of nociception and physiological stress on the fetus, and decrease fetal movement to enable the safe execution of procedures (GRADE 2C); and (3) due to maternal risk and a lack of evidence supporting benefit to the fetus, we recommend against the administration of fetal analgesia at the time of pregnancy termination (GRADE 1C).

Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine Consult Series #59: The use of analgesia and anesthesia for maternal-fetal procedures.

Pain is a complex phenomenon that involves more than a simple physical response to external stimuli. In maternal-fetal surgical procedures, fetal analgesia is used primarily to blunt fetal autonomic responses and minimize fetal movement. The purpose of this Consult is to review the literature on what is known about the potential for fetal awareness of pain and to discuss the indications for and the risk-benefit calculus involved in the use of fetal anesthesia and analgesia. The recommendations by the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine are as follows: (1) we suggest that fetal paralytic agents be considered in the setting of intrauterine transfusion, if needed, for the purpose of decreasing fetal movement (GRADE 2C); (2) although the fetus is unable to experience pain at the gestational age when procedures are typically performed, we suggest that opioid analgesia should be administered to the fetus during invasive fetal surgical procedures to attenuate acute autonomic responses that may be deleterious, avoid long-term consequences of nociception and physiological stress on the fetus, and decrease fetal movement to enable the safe execution of procedures (GRADE 2C); and (3) due to maternal risk and a lack of evidence supporting benefit to the fetus, we recommend against the administration of fetal analgesia at the time of pregnancy termination (GRADE 1C).

The association between pre-conception intuitive eating and gestational weight gain.

PURPOSE: To determine if pre-conception intuitive eating, an adaptive eating behavior, was related to gestational weight gain (GWG) and the likelihood of exceeding GWG recommendations. METHODS: This prospective survey study took place in an outpatient obstetric clinic. Participants completed the pre-conception Intuitive Eating Scale for Pregnancy during a prenatal check-up appointment and total GWG was collected from the medical record. The pre-conception Intuitive Eating Scale for Pregnancy assesses unconditional permission to eat, eating for physical rather than emotional reasons, and reliance on hunger and satiety to inform what, when, and how much to eat. Hierarchical linear multiple regression and logistic multiple regression analyses determined associations between pre-conception intuitive eating and GWG on the total sample and stratified by weight status (normal/underweight, overweight, and obese). RESULTS: The majority of the sample (n = 253) was white, married, employed, had annual household income > $50,000, and had a college degree. No aspects of pre-conception intuitive eating predicted the likelihood of excess GWG. However, in the total sample, unconditional permission to eat (subscale) was inversely related to total GWG (B = -0.16, p < 0.05). Among women with obesity (n = 36), eating for physical rather than emotional reasons (subscale) was inversely related to total GWG (B = -0.47, p < 0.05). DISCUSSION: Some aspects of intuitive eating during the pre-conception period were related to total GWG, particularly for women with obesity. However, intuitive eating scores did not increase or decrease the likelihood of excess GWG. More research is needed to understand the mechanisms for this association before clinical recommendations can be made. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III (Evidence obtained from well-designed cohort or case-control analytic studies).

Factors associated with abortion at 12 or more weeks gestation after implementation of a restrictive Texas law.

OBJECTIVE: To examine factors associated with obtaining abortion at 12 or more weeks gestation in Texas after implementation of a restrictive law. STUDY DESIGN: In this retrospective cohort study, we collected data from eight Texas abortion clinics that provided services at 12 or more weeks gestation from April 1, 2015 to March 30, 2016, after a restrictive abortion law enacted in November 2013 shuttered many of the state's clinics. We examined factors associated with obtaining in-clinic abortion services between 3-11 versus 12-24 weeks gestation including patient race-ethnicity, income level, and driving distance to the clinic using chi-square tests and calculating odds ratios. We further subcategorized abortion between 15-24 weeks to determine who may be most affected by a Texas law banning dilation and evacuation (D&E). RESULTS: Among 24,555 in-clinic abortions, 19.2% (n = 4,714) occurred at 12 or more weeks gestation. Compared to patients who obtained care between 3-11 weeks, those who obtained care at 12 or more weeks were more likely to be Black than White (OR 1.18; 95% CI 1.05-1.31), live ≤110% of the federal poverty level than have higher income (OR 2.09; 95% CI 1.94-2.26), and drive 50+ miles than 1-24 miles to obtain care (OR 1.25; 95% CI 1.15-1.38). These associations remained for those obtaining care between 15-24 weeks. Even after adjusting for race-ethnicity and driving distance, low-income patients had greater odds of obtaining care in between 15-24 weeks (aOR 1.52; 95% CI 1.21-1.91). CONCLUSIONS: Patients obtaining abortion at 12 or more weeks gestation in Texas are more likely to be Black, low-income, and travel far distances to obtain in-clinic care. IMPLICATIONS: In Texas, patients who are Black, low-income, and travel the farthest are more likely to obtain in-clinic abortion between 15-24 weeks gestation, commonly performed via D&E. If Texas Senate Bill 8 (SB8) banning D&E goes into effect, these patients may be prevented from obtaining care.

Association of Immediate Postpartum Etonogestrel Implant Insertion and Venous Thromboembolism.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the rate of readmissions for postpartum venous thromboembolism (VTE) during the first 30 days postdelivery between women with and without the immediate postpartum insertion of the etonogestrel contraceptive implant. METHODS: The Nationwide Readmissions Database from 2016 was used to identify women with a singleton delivery, immediate postpartum insertion of the etonogestrel contraceptive implant, and readmission for VTE within 30 days of discharge. Those with a prior history of VTE or anticoagulant therapy were excluded. These women were compared with the number of women readmitted within 30 days for VTE who did not have the contraceptive implant placed during delivery admission. RESULTS: Of 3,387,120 deliveries, 8,369 women underwent etonogestrel contraceptive implant placement during the delivery admission. There was no difference identified in the rate of readmission for VTE between exposed and unexposed women. Of these, seven had received a postpartum etonogestrel contraceptive implant (0.85/1,000; 95% CI 0.22-1.45/1,000 deliveries), compared with 1,192 without an etonogestrel contraceptive implant (0.35/1,000; 95% CI 0.33-0.37/1,000 deliveries); odds ratio (OR) 2.41; 95% CI 0.58-9.89. The rates of diabetes, thrombophilia, systemic lupus erythematosus, and cesarean birth did not differ between groups. Women who underwent etonogestrel contraceptive implant placement were younger and were more likely to have government-sponsored health insurance, a smoking history, hypertension, peripartum infection, or postpartum hemorrhage than women who did not receive an etonogestrel contraceptive implant (P<.001). After adjusting for these confounders, there remained no difference in rates of VTE, adjusted OR 1.81; 95% CI 0.44-7.45. CONCLUSION: The immediate postpartum placement of the etonogestrel contraceptive implant was not associated with an increased rate of VTE; however, our sample size was underpowered to determine no difference.

Medication abortion use among low-income and rural Texans before and during state-imposed restrictions and after FDA-updated labeling.

BACKGROUND: In 2013, the Texas legislature passed House Bill 2, restricting use of medication abortion to comply with Food and Drug Administration labeling from 2000. The Food and Drug Administration updated its labeling for medication abortion in 2016, alleviating some of the burdens imposed by House Bill 2. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to identify the impact of House Bill 2 on medication abortion use by patient travel distance to an open clinic and income status. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this retrospective study, we collected patient zip code, county of residence, type of abortion, family size, and income data on all patients who received an abortion (medication or aspiration) from 7 Texas abortion clinics in 3 time periods: pre-House Bill 2 (July 1, 2012-June 30, 2013), during House Bill 2 (April 1, 2015-March 30, 2016), and post-Food and Drug Administration labeling update (April 1, 2016-March 30, 2017). Patient driving distance to the clinic where care was obtained was categorized as 1-24, 25-49, 50-99, or 100+ miles. Patient county of residence was categorized by availability of a clinic during House Bill 2 (open clinic), county with a House Bill 2-related clinic closure (closed clinic), or no clinic any time period. Patient income was categorized as ≤110% federal poverty level (low-income) and >110% federal poverty level. Change in medication abortion use in the 3 time periods by patient driving distance, residence in a county with an open clinic, and income status were evaluated using χ2 tests and logistic regression. We used geospatial mapping to depict the spatial distribution of patients who obtained a medication abortion in each time period. RESULTS: Among 70,578 abortion procedures, medication abortion comprised 26%, 7%, and 29% of cases pre-House Bill 2, during House Bill 2, and post-Food and Drug Administration labeling update, respectively. During House Bill 2, patients traveling 100+ miles compared to 1- 24 miles were less likely to use medication abortion (odds ratio, 0.21; 95% confidence interval, 0.15, 0.30), as were low-income compared to higher-income patients (odds ratio, 0.76; 95% confidence interval, 0.68, 0.85), and low-income, distant patients (adjusted odds ratio, 0.14; 95% confidence interval, 0.08, 0.25). Similarly, post-Food and Drug Administration labeling update, rebound in medication abortion use was less pronounced for patients traveling 100+ miles compared to 1-24 miles (odds ratio, 0.82; 95% confidence interval, 0.74, 0.91), low-income compared to higher-income patients (odds ratio, 0.77; 95% confidence interval, 0.72, 0.81), and low-income, distant patients (adjusted odds ratio, 0.80; 95% confidence interval, 0.68, 0.94). Post-Food and Drug Administration labeling update, patients residing in counties with House Bill 2-related clinic closures were less likely to receive medication abortion as driving distance increased (52% traveling 25-49 miles, 41% traveling 50-99 miles, and 26% traveling 100+ miles, P < .05). Geospatial mapping demonstrated that patients traveled from all over the state to receive medication abortion pre-House Bill 2 and post-Food and Drug Administration labeling update, whereas during House Bill 2, only those living in or near a county with an open clinic obtained medication abortion. CONCLUSION: Texas state law drastically restricted access to medication abortion and had a disproportionate impact on low-income patients and those living farther from an open clinic. After the Food and Drug Administration labeling update, medication abortion use rebounded, but disparities in use remained.

Increased 1-year continuation of DMPA among women randomized to self-administration: results from a randomized controlled trial at Planned Parenthood.

OBJECTIVES: Self-administration of subcutaneous depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA-sc) is feasible, acceptable, and effective. Our objective was to compare one-year continuation of DMPA-sc between women randomized to self-administration versus clinic administration. STUDY DESIGN: We randomized 401 females ages 15-44 requesting DMPA at clinics in Texas and New Jersey to self-administration or clinic administration in a 1:1 allocation. Clinic staff taught participants randomized to self-administration to self-inject and observed the first injection; participants received instructions, a sharps container, and three doses for home use. Participants randomized to clinic administration received usual care. All participants received DMPA-sc at no cost and injection reminders via text message or email. We conducted follow-up surveys at six and 12 months. RESULTS: Three hundred thirty-six participants (84%) completed the 12-month survey; 316 completed both follow-up surveys (an 80% response rate excluding eight withdrawals). Participants ranged in age from 16-44. One-year DMPA continuous use was 69% in the self-administration group and 54% in the clinic group (p=.005). There were three self-reported pregnancies during the study period, all occurred in the clinic group; all three women had discontinued DMPA and one reported her pregnancy as intended. Among the self-administration group, 97% reported that self-administration was very or somewhat easy; 87% would recommend self-administration of DMPA-sc to a friend. Among the clinic group, 52% reported interest in self-administration in the future. Satisfaction was similar between groups. No serious adverse events were reported. CONCLUSIONS: DMPA self-administration improves contraceptive continuation and is a feasible and acceptable option for women and adolescents. IMPLICATIONS: Self-administration of subcutaneous DMPA can improve contraceptive access, autonomy, and continuation, and is a feasible and acceptable option for women and adolescents. It should be made widely available as an option for women and adolescents.