Young people's support for and personal interest in an advance provision model for medication abortion.

PURPOSE: To assess young people's interest in advance provision (AP) of medication abortion- receiving mifepristone and misoprostol from a clinician in advance for their future use. METHODS: From November 2022-August 2023 we administered an electronic survey regarding advance provision to patients assigned female at birth at four Bay Area youth-serving clinics. RESULTS: Among 152 people ages 14-24 years (mean 17.9) surveyed, 73.7% (95% CI, 65.9%-80.5%) supported and 46.1% (95% CI, 65.9%-80.5%) were interested in the AP model. AP interest was higher among people who experienced three or more difficulties trying to access reproductive healthcare [70.6% (95% CI 44.0%, 89.7%)] and who experienced food or housing insecurity [60.3% (95% CI 46.6%, 73.0%)]. Most youth (81.6%) had a safe place to store the pills for later use; this proportion was significantly higher among people ages 18-24 years (88.5%) than teens ages 14-17 years (74.3%, p=.025). The most common perceived advantages of AP included being able to have the abortion earlier in pregnancy (61.8%), privacy (57.9%) and convenience (50.7%). Common disadvantages noted included concern that people might take the pills incorrectly (50.0%) or lose the pills (40.1%). CONCLUSIONS: Young people have considerable interest in AP of medication abortion. Further research is needed to document the AP model's feasibility, clinical outcomes, and effect on access for adolescents.

Self-Managed Abortion Attempts Before vs After Changes in Federal Abortion Protections in the US.

Importance: With decreasing access to facility-based abortion in the US, an increase in self-managed abortion (SMA) using various methods is anticipated. To date, no studies have examined changes in SMA in the shifting policy landscape. Objective: To estimate changes in SMA prevalence among the general US population from before to after the Supreme Court's June 2022 decision overturning federal abortion protections. Design, Setting, and Participants: Serial cross-sectional surveys were administered throughout the US from December 10, 2021, to January 11, 2022, and June 14 to July 7, 2023. Participants included online panel members assigned female sex at birth, ages 18 to 49 years (or ages 15-17 years if a household member), who were English- or Spanish-speaking. Exposure: Year of the survey (2021-2022 vs 2023). Main Outcome and Measures: Participants were asked whether they had "ever taken or done something on their own, without medical assistance, to try to end a pregnancy" and, if so, details of their experience. Changes in the weighted SMA prevalence between survey years were examined, factors associated with SMA experience were identified, and projected lifetime SMA prevalence was calculated using discrete-time event history models, accounting for abortion underreporting. Results: Median age of the participants was 32.5 (IQR, 25-41) years in 2021-2022 (n = 7016) and 32.0 (IQR, 24-40) in 2023 (n = 7148). Across both years, approximately 14% were non-Hispanic Black, 21% were Hispanic, and 54% were non-Hispanic White. The weighted adjusted proportion that ever attempted SMA was 2.4% (95% CI, 1.9%-3.0%) in 2021-2022 and 3.4% (95% CI, 2.8%-4.0%) in 2023-an increase of 1.0% (95% CI, 0.2%-1.7%; P = .03). Projected lifetime SMA prevalence accounting for abortion underreporting was 10.7% (95% CI, 8.6%-12.8%). In adjusted analyses, SMA experience was higher among non-Hispanic Black (4.3%; 95% CI, 2.8%-5.8%) vs other racial and ethnic (2.7%; 95% CI, 2.2%-3.1%) groups (P = .04) and sexual and gender minority (5.0%; 95% CI, 3.4%-6.6%) vs heterosexual or cisgender (2.5%; 95% CI, 2.0%-2.9%) participants (P < .001). Approximately 4 in 10 (45.3% in 2021 and 39.0% in 2023) SMA attempts occurred before age 20 years. The methods used included herbs (29.8% [2021-2022] vs 25.9% [2023]), physical methods (28.6% [2021-2022] vs 29.7% [2023]), or alcohol or other substances (17.9% [2021-2022] vs 18.6% [2023]). Few participants (7.1% [2021-2022] vs 4.7% [2023]) sought emergency care for a complication. Conclusions and Relevance: In this serial nationally representative survey study, increased SMA was observed following the loss of federal abortion protections. The findings revealed increased SMA use among marginalized groups, most often with ineffective methods. These findings suggest the need to expand access to alternative models of safe and effective abortion care and ensure those seeking health care post-SMA do not face legal risks.

Primary care and abortion provider perspectives on mail-order medication abortion: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: This qualitative study aims to assess perspectives of clinicians and clinic staff on mail-order pharmacy dispensing for medication abortion. METHODS: Participants included clinicians and staff involved in implementing a mail-order dispensing model for medication abortion at eleven clinics in seven states as part of a prospective cohort study, which began in January 2020 (before the FDA removed the in-person dispensing requirement for mifepristone). From June 2021 to July 2022, we invited participants at the participating clinics, including six primary care and five abortion clinics, to complete a semi-structured video interview about their experiences. We then conducted qualitative thematic analysis of interview data, summarizing themes related to perceived benefits and concerns about the mail-order model, perceived patient interest, and potential barriers to larger-scale implementation. RESULTS: We conducted 24 interviews in total with clinicians (13 physicians and one nurse practitioner) and clinic staff (n = 10). Participants highlighted perceived benefits of the mail-order model, including its potential to expand abortion services into primary care, increase patient autonomy and privacy, and to normalize abortion services. They also highlighted key logistical, clinical, and feasibility concerns about the mail-order model, and specific challenges related to integrating abortion into primary care. CONCLUSION: Clinicians and clinic staff working in primary care and abortion clinics were optimistic that mail-order dispensing of medication abortion can improve the ability of some providers to provide abortion and enable more patients to access services. The feasibility of mail-order pharmacy dispensing of medication abortion following the Supreme Court Dobbs decision is to be determined. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registry: Clinicaltrials.gov. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03913104. Date of registration: first submitted on April 3, 2019 and first posted on April 12, 2019.

Mandatory Warning Signs for Cannabis: Perspectives and Preferences of Pregnant and Recently Pregnant People Who Use Cannabis.

BACKGROUND: Five U.S. states where recreational cannabis is legal require Mandatory Warning Signs for cannabis use during pregnancy (MWS-cannabis) to be posted in cannabis dispensaries. Previous research has found adverse health consequences associated with MWS-cannabis and that people lack trust in information on signs. This qualitative study explores people's perspectives and preferences regarding MWS-cannabis. METHODS: We conducted in-depth interviews with 34 pregnant or recently pregnant individuals from multiple states with varying policy climates in the U.S. who used cannabis before and/or during pregnancy. We asked participants about their perspectives on MWS-cannabis and reactions to specific messages. We reviewed transcripts using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Participants reported mostly negative views on MWS-cannabis, suggesting they may have stigmatizing and negative impacts on pregnant people who use cannabis, discouraging them from seeking care. Many said that the scientific evidence is not strong enough to justify MWS-cannabis, and that they are unlikely to deter pregnant people from using cannabis. Participants asserted that vague or fear-based messages, distrust of government, and the location and timing of the signs undermine the goals of MWS-cannabis. When reacting to specific messages, participants preferred messages that are evidence-based, clear, specific, and aligned with autonomous decision-making. CONCLUSIONS: Pregnant and recently pregnant people who use cannabis have mostly negative perceptions of MWS-cannabis and believe they have negative consequences. More work is needed to develop health information resources that meet the needs of people who use cannabis in pregnancy without increasing stigma.

Comparison of No-Test Telehealth and In-Person Medication Abortion.

Importance: In the US, access to medication abortion using history-based (no-test) eligibility assessment, including through telehealth and mailing of mifepristone, has grown rapidly. Additional evidence on the effectiveness and safety of these models is needed. Objective: To evaluate whether medication abortion with no-test eligibility assessment and mailing of medications is as effective as in-person care with ultrasonography and safe overall. Design, Setting, and Participants: Prospective, observational study with noninferiority analysis. Sites included 4 abortion-providing organizations in Colorado, Illinois, Maryland, Minnesota, Virginia, and Washington from May 2021 to March 2023. Eligible patients were seeking medication abortion up to and including 70 days' gestation, spoke English or Spanish, and were aged 15 years or older. Exposure: Study groups reflected the model of care selected by the patient and clinicians and included: (1) no-test (telehealth) eligibility assessment and mailing of medications (no-test + mail) (n = 228); (2) no-test eligibility assessment and pickup of medications (no-test + pickup) (n = 119); or (3) in-person with ultrasonography (n = 238). Main Outcomes and Measures: Effectiveness, defined as a complete abortion without the need for repeating the mifepristone and misoprostol regimen or a follow-up procedure, and safety, defined as an abortion-related serious adverse event, including overnight hospital admission, surgery, or blood transfusion. Outcomes were derived from patient surveys and medical records. Primary analysis focused on the comparison of the no-test + mail group with the in-person with ultrasonography group. Results: The mean age of the participants (N = 585) was 27.3 years; most identified as non-Hispanic White (48.6%) or non-Hispanic Black (28.1%). Median (IQR) gestational duration was 45 days (39-53) and comparable between study groups (P = .30). Outcome data were available for 91.8% of participants. Overall effectiveness was 94.4% (95% CI, 90.7%-99.2%) in the no-test + mail group and 93.3% (95% CI, 88.3%-98.2%) in the in-person with ultrasonography group in adjusted models (adjusted risk difference, 1.2 [95% CI, -4.1 to 6.4]), meeting the prespecified 5% noninferiority margin. Serious adverse events included overnight hospitalization (n = 4), blood transfusion (n = 2), and emergency surgery (n = 1) and were reported by 1.1% (95% CI, 0.4%-2.4%) of participants, with 3 in the no-test + mail group, 3 in the in-person with ultrasonography group, and none in the no-test + pickup group. Conclusions and Relevance: This prospective, observational study found that medication abortion obtained following no-test telehealth screening and mailing of medications was associated with similar rates of complete abortion compared with in-person care with ultrasonography and met prespecified criteria for noninferiority, with a low prevalence of adverse events.

PROTOCOL: Abortion and mental health outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

This is a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of research on mental health outcomes of abortion. Does abortion increase the risk of adverse mental health outcomes? That is the central question for this review. Our review aims to inform policy and practice by locating, critically appraising, and synthesizing empirical evidence on associations between abortion and subsequent mental health outcomes. Given the controversies surrounding this topic and the complex social, political, legal, and ideological contexts in which research and reviews on abortion are conducted, it is especially important to conduct this systematic review and meta-analysis with comprehensive, rigorous, unbiased, and transparent methods. We will include a variety of study designs to enhance understanding of studies' methodological strengths and weaknesses and to identify potential explanations for conflicting results. We will follow open science principles, providing access to our methods, measures, and results, and making data available for re-analysis.

Mail-Order Pharmacy Dispensing of Mifepristone for Medication Abortion After In-Person Screening.

Importance: Before 2021, the US Food and Drug Administration required mifepristone to be dispensed in person, limiting access to medication abortion. Objective: To estimate the effectiveness, acceptability, and feasibility of dispensing mifepristone for medication abortion using a mail-order pharmacy. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective cohort study was conducted from January 2020 to May 2022 and included 11 clinics in 7 states (5 abortion clinics and 6 primary care sites, 4 of which were new to abortion provision). Eligible participants were seeking medication abortion at 63 or fewer days' gestation, spoke English or Spanish, were age 15 years or older, and were willing to take misoprostol buccally. After assessing eligibility for medication abortion through an in-person screening, mifepristone and misoprostol were prescribed using a mail-order pharmacy. Patients had standard follow-up care with the clinic. Clinical information was collected from medical records. Consenting participants completed online surveys about their experiences 3 and 14 days after enrolling. A total of 540 participants were enrolled; 10 withdrew or did not take medication. Data were analyzed from August 2022 to December 2023. Intervention: Mifepristone, 200 mg, and misoprostol, 800 µg, prescribed to a mail-order pharmacy and mailed to participants instead of dispensed in person. Main Outcomes and Measures: Proportion of patients with a complete abortion with medications only, reporting satisfaction with the medication abortion, and reporting timely delivery of medications. Results: Clinical outcome information was obtained and analyzed for 510 abortions (96.2%) among 506 participants (median [IQR] age, 27 [23-31] years; 506 [100%] female; 194 [38.3%] Black, 88 [17.4%] Hispanic, 141 [27.9%] White, and 45 [8.9%] multiracial/other individuals). Of these, 436 participants (85.5%; 95% CI, 82.2%-88.4%) received medications within 3 days. Complete abortion occurred after medication use in 499 cases (97.8%; 95% CI, 96.2%-98.9%). There were 24 adverse events (4.7%) for which care was sought for medication abortion symptoms; 3 patients (0.6%; 95% CI, 0.1%-1.7%) experienced serious adverse events requiring hospitalization (1 with blood transfusion); however, no adverse events were associated with mail-order dispensing. Of 477 participants, 431 (90.4%; 95% CI, 87.3%-92.9%) indicated that they would use mail-order dispensing again for abortion care, and 435 participants (91.2%; 95% CI, 88.3%-93.6%) reported satisfaction with the medication abortion. Findings were similar to those of other published studies of medication abortion with in-person dispensing. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this cohort study indicate that mail-order pharmacy dispensing of mifepristone for medication abortion was effective, acceptable to patients, and feasible, with a low prevalence of serious adverse events. This care model should be expanded to improve access to medication abortion services.

Interest in and Support for Alternative Models of Medication Abortion Provision Among Patients Seeking Abortion in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: Medication abortion is safe and effective, but restrictions still limit patients from accessing this method. Alternative models of medication abortion provision, namely advance provision, over-the-counter (OTC), and online, could help improve access to care for some, although there is limited evidence about abortion patients' interest in these models. METHODS: Between 2017 and 2019, we administered a cross-sectional survey to abortion patients at 45 clinics across 15 U.S. states to explore their interest in and support for advance provision, OTC, and online abortion access. We assessed relationships between sociodemographic characteristics and interest in and support for each model using bivariate logistic regressions and present perceived advantages and disadvantages of each model, as described by a subset of participants. RESULTS: Among 1,965 people enrolled, 1,759 (90%) initiated the survey. Interest in and support for advance provision was highest (72% and 82%, respectively), followed by OTC (63% and 72%) and online access (57% and 70%). In bivariate analyses, non-Hispanic Black and Asian/Pacific Islander respondents expressed lower interest and support for the online model and Alaska Native/Native American respondents expressed higher interest in an OTC model, as compared with white respondents. Among 439 participants naming advantages and disadvantages of each model, the most common advantages included convenience and having the abortion earlier. The most common disadvantages were not seeing a provider first and possibly taking pills incorrectly. CONCLUSIONS: Although most abortion patients expressed interest in and support for alternative models of medication abortion provision, variation in support across race/ethnicity highlights a need to ensure that abortion care service models meet the needs and preferences of all patients, particularly people from historically underserved populations.

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.

Abortion pills on TV: An exploratory study of the associations between abortion plotline viewership and beliefs regarding in-clinic and self-managed medication abortion.

OBJECTIVES: Entertainment television is an influential source of health information, including about reproductive health. We investigated the association between exposure to television plotlines about medication abortion on audience awareness and beliefs about medication abortion. STUDY DESIGN: We administered a national cross-sectional online survey from December 2021 to January 2022 with a probability-based sample of people assigned female at birth. We asked respondents to select plotlines they had seen from a list of seven that portrayed medication abortion. Among the 3425 people who responded to plotline items, 3340 responded to our outcome measures. Using weighed multivariable analyses, we examined adjusted relationships between exposure to specific types of abortion plotlines and awareness of and beliefs about medication abortion medical safety. RESULTS: We found that audience exposure to medication abortion plotlines in which the medication abortion was obtained from a clinic and portrayed as safe was associated with greater awareness of medication abortion compared to nonexposure (RR: 1.68; 95% CI: 1.17, 2.40). Exposure to plotlines that portrayed MA or self-managed MA as safe was associated with audience beliefs that medication abortion is safe. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that the content of abortion plotlines and exposure to accurate information may be connected to audience awareness of and beliefs about abortion. IMPLICATIONS: In a climate of misinformation about abortion, audience exposure to medically accurate television plotlines about medication abortion may be an effective way to increase awareness of medication abortion and influence beliefs about medication abortion safety.

Experiences of delay-causing obstacles and mental health at the time of abortion seeking.

Objectives: The delays and challenges people encounter when seeking abortion are well-documented, but their psychological implications are understudied. Aiming to fill this gap, we explored the associations between experiences of delay-causing obstacles to abortion care and adverse mental health symptoms among individuals seeking abortion care. Study design: In 2019, we surveyed 784 people (of 1092 approached) ages 15-45 accessing abortion care in four clinics in abortion-supportive states: California, Illinois, and New Mexico. We conducted multivariable Poisson regressions to examine associations between experiencing delay-causing obstacles to abortion care and stress, anxiety, and depression at the abortion appointment. We also used Poisson regression to examine whether some individuals are more likely to experience delay-causing obstacles than others. Results: Three in five participants (58%) experienced delay-causing obstacles when accessing abortion care. The most prevalent obstacles were cost-related (45%), followed by access-related (43%), and travel time-related (35%) delays. In adjusted analyses, experiencing any type of delay-causing obstacle to abortion care was significantly associated with more symptoms of stress, anxiety, and depression and higher risk of anxiety and depressive disorders. Participants were more likely to experience delay-causing obstacles if they traveled from another state or over 100 miles to reach the clinic, sought abortion beyond 13 weeks gestation, lacked money for unexpected expenses, and found it difficult to pay for the abortion. Conclusion: Abortion is a time-sensitive healthcare, but most individuals are forced to delay care due to various obstacles that may have a negative impact on their psychological well-being. Implications: Obstacles causing delays in accessing abortion care may contribute to elevated symptoms of stress, anxiety, and depression and higher risk of anxiety and depressive disorders for abortion patients. As restrictive policies increase, delays are likely to worsen, potentially leading to psychological harm for people seeking abortion.

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.

Is legal recreational cannabis associated with cannabis use during pregnancy, beliefs about safety, and perceived community stigma?

BACKGROUND: Among pregnant and recently pregnant people we investigated whether legal recreational cannabis is associated with pregnancy-related cannabis use, safety beliefs, and perceived community stigma. METHODS: In 2022, we surveyed 3571 currently and recently pregnant English- or Spanish-speaking adults in 37 states. Primary outcomes included cannabis use during pregnancy and two continuous scale measures of beliefs about safety and perceived community stigma. Using generalized linear models and mixed effects ordinal logistic regression with random effects for state, we assessed associations between legal recreational cannabis and outcomes of interest, controlling for state-level and individual-level covariates and specifying appropriate functional form. RESULTS: Those who reported cannabis use during pregnancy were more likely to believe it is safe and to perceive community stigma compared to those who did not report use during pregnancy. Legal recreational cannabis was not associated with cannabis use during pregnancy, continuation or increase in use, frequency of use, or safety beliefs. Legal recreational cannabis was associated with lower perceived community stigma (coefficient: -0.07, 95% CI: -0.13, -0.01), including among those who reported use during (coefficient = -0.22, 95% CI: -0.40, -0.04) and prior to but not during (coefficient = -0.19, 95% CI: -0.37, -0.01) pregnancy. CONCLUSION: Findings do not support concerns that legal recreational cannabis is associated with cannabis use during pregnancy or beliefs about safety. Legal recreational cannabis may be associated with lower community stigma around cannabis use during pregnancy, which could have implications for pregnant people's disclosure of use and care-seeking behavior.

Support for criminalization of self-managed abortion (SMA): A national representative survey.

OBJECTIVE: Since the U.S. Supreme Court eliminated the federal right to abortion, there is a heightened need to understand public opinion about the criminalization of people who attempt to end their pregnancies outside the formal healthcare setting, referred to as self-managed abortion (SMA). We assessed U.S. attitudes about whether three forms of SMA should be legal, reported or punished: 1) using abortion pills obtained outside the healthcare system, 2) using other medications, drugs, herbs, or by drinking alcohol, and 3) using traumatic methods (inserting an object in their body or hitting their stomach). METHODS: From December 2021 to January 2022, we administered a national probability-based online survey to English- and Spanish-speaking people assigned female (AFAB, ages 15-49) or male at birth (AMAB, ages 18-49) regarding their attitudes about criminalizing SMA, using Ipsos' KnowledgePanel. We estimated weighted proportions and conducted multivariable regression analyses to identify characteristics associated with support for SMA legality and punishment (reporting to authorities, paying a fine or going to jail). RESULTS: A total of 7,016 AFAB and 360 AMAB completed the survey. People were less likely (p < .05) to agree that SMA using abortion pills should be illegal (34% of AFAB and 43% of AMAB) than other forms of SMA (36-48%), although over one-fifth were unsure (AFAB, 20-23% and AMAB, 24-27%). People were less likely to agree SMA using abortion pills should be criminalized than SMA using other drugs, medications, herbs, alcohol or by using traumatic methods. In multivariable analyses, AMAB and Christian religion were associated with agreeing that SMA using abortion pills should be illegal; people who identified as Hispanic/Latinx ethnicity and experienced medical mistreatment were less likely to agree SMA with medication abortion pills should be illegal. CONCLUSIONS: Public support for criminalizing SMA is complex and varied by SMA method and form of punishment.

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.

Association Between Facility and Clinician Characteristics and Family Planning Services Provided During U.S. Outpatient Care Visits.

INTRODUCTION: Recent guidelines from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention emphasize the importance of access to comprehensive family planning services and recommend patient-centered contraceptive counseling be incorporated into routine primary care visits for reproductive-age individuals. This study aims to describe family planning service provision in outpatient care settings and assess differences by facility and clinician characteristics. METHODS: Using National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey data, a nationally representative survey of outpatient care visits, we assessed family planning service provision by facility location, facility type, physician specialty, types of clinicians seen, and whether the patient was seen by their primary care provider. We used random intercept logistic regression with robust standard errors, adjusting for patient characteristics, and state and year fixed effects. RESULTS: The analytic sample included 53,489 patient visits with reproductive-age (15-49 years) individuals between 2011 and 2019. Family planning services were provided at 8% of total sampled visits and were more likely to be provided in urban compared with rural areas (adjusted odds ratio, 1.45; p = .02) and at community health centers compared with private physician practices (adjusted odds ratio, 1.74; p = .00). Family planning services were also more likely to be provided when the patient saw a physician assistant or nurse compared with only a physician. After controlling for observed covariates, measures of between-clinician heterogeneity indicate wide variation in which clinicians provided family planning services. CONCLUSIONS: Family planning services were more likely to be provided in urban areas, at community health centers, and when patients received team-based care. The wide variation between clinicians suggests a need to better incorporate family planning services into primary care and other outpatient settings to meet patient needs and preferences.

Association of Mandatory Warning Signs for Cannabis Use During Pregnancy With Cannabis Use Beliefs and Behaviors.

Importance: As states have legalized recreational cannabis use, some have enacted policies mandating point-of-sale warning signs with information on harms of using cannabis during pregnancy. While research has found such warning signs are associated with increased adverse birth outcomes, reasons why are unclear. Objective: To examine whether exposure to cannabis warning signs is associated with cannabis-related beliefs, stigma, and use. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used data from a population-based online survey conducted from May to June 2022. Participants included pregnant and recently pregnant (within past 2 years) members of the national probability KnowledgePanel and nonprobability samples in all US states and Washington, the District of Columbia, where recreational cannabis is legal. Data were analyzed from July 2022 to April 2023. Exposure: Living in 1 of 5 states with a warning signs policy. Main Outcomes and Measures: Outcomes of interest were self-reported beliefs (linear) that cannabis use during pregnancy is not safe, should be punished, and is stigmatized and cannabis use during pregnancy (dichotomous). Regressions, accounting for survey weights and clustering by state, examined associations of warning signs with cannabis-related beliefs and use. Results: A total of 2063 pregnant or recently pregnant people (mean [SD] weighted age, 32 [6] years) completed the survey, and 585 participants (weighted, 17%) reported using cannabis during their pregnancy. Among people who used cannabis during their pregnancy, living in a warning signs state was associated with beliefs that cannabis use during pregnancy was safe (ß = -0.33 [95% CI, -0.60 to -0.07]) and that people who used cannabis during pregnancy should not be punished (ß = -0.40 [95% CI, -0.73 to -0.07]). Among people who did not use cannabis before or during pregnancy, living in a warning signs state was associated with beliefs that use was not safe (ß = 0.34 [95% CI, 0.17 to 0.51]), that people should be punished for use (ß = 0.35 [95% CI, 0.24 to 0.47]), and that use was stigmatized (ß = 0.35 [95% CI, 0.07 to 0.63]). Warning signs policies were not associated with use (adjusted odds ratio, 1.11 [95% CI, 0.22 to 5.67]). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study of warning signs and cannabis-related use and beliefs, warning signs policies were not associated with reduced cannabis use during pregnancy or with people who used cannabis believing use during pregnancy was less safe but were associated with greater support for punishment and stigma among people who did not use cannabis.

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.

Changes in the Frequency and Type of Barriers to Reproductive Health Care Between 2017 and 2021.

Importance: Previous research has documented individual-level barriers to reproductive health services, but few studies have examined national trends. Objective: To determine whether the number and type of barriers to reproductive health care experienced by US women of reproductive age changed from 2017 to 2021. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used serial survey data, weighted to be nationally representative, collected in August 2017 and December 2021 from members of Ipsos's KnowledgePanel who were aged 18 to 49 years and assigned female at birth. Exposures: Having experienced barriers to reproductive health care over the past 3 years. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was number and type of barriers to reproductive health care services, including Papanicolaou tests or birth control, experienced in the past 3 years. Increases in barriers to reproductive health care were measured using multivariable linear regressions adjusted for age, race and ethnicity, education level, employment status, metropolitan area, geographic region, household income, and language (English vs Spanish). Results: Of 29 496 KnowledgePanel members invited, 7022 (mean [SD] age, 33.9 [9.0] years) and 6841 (mean [SD] age, 34.2 [8.6] years) completed the 2017 and 2021 surveys (50% and 45% response rates, respectively). Among 12 351 participants who indicated that they had ever tried accessing reproductive health services, 35.9% (95% CI, 34.8%-37.0%) were aged 30 to 39 years; 5.5% (95% CI, 4.9%-6.2%) were Asian or Pacific Islander, 13.7% (95% CI, 12.8%-14.6%) were Black, 19.1% (95% CI, 18.1%-20.1%) were Hispanic, 58.2% (95% CI, 57.0%-59.5%) were White, and 3.5% (95% CI, 3.1%-4.0%) were multiracial or of other race or ethnicity; and 11.7% (95% CI, 11.0%-12.5%) were living below 100% of the federal poverty level. Covariate distribution was similar across years. In bivariable analyses, participants were more likely to report experiencing a given barrier in the past 3 years in 2021 than in 2017 for all but 2 barriers. More people experienced 3 or more barriers in 2021 (18.6%; 95% CI, 17.3%-20.0%) than in 2017 (16.1%; 95% CI, 14.9%-17.4%) (P = .008). In multivariable analyses, the mean number of barriers increased significantly from 1.09 (95% CI, 1.02-1.14) in 2017 to 1.29 (95% CI, 1.22-1.37) (P < .001) in 2021. Participants who were aged 25 to 29 years (0.42; 95% CI, 0.37-0.47), identified as Hispanic (0.41; 95% CI, 0.38-0.45), had no high school diploma or General Educational Development test (0.62; 95% CI, 0.53-0.72), lived below 100% of the federal poverty level (0.65; 95% CI, 0.55-0.73), and took the survey in Spanish (0.87; 95% CI, 0.73-1.01) saw the greatest increases in mean number of barriers between 2017 and 2021. Conclusions and Relevance: The study findings suggest that barriers to reproductive health care increased between 2017 and 2021, with the largest increases observed among individuals from historically disadvantaged populations. Efforts are needed to ensure that reproductive health care access remains a priority.