Patient experiences using public and private insurance coverage for abortion in Illinois: Implementation successes and remaining gaps.

CONTEXT: Insurance coverage for abortion in states where care remains legal can alleviate financial burdens for patients and increase access. Recent policy changes in Illinois required Medicaid and some private insurance plans to cover abortion care. This study explores policy implementation from the perspectives of patients using their insurance to obtain early abortion care. METHODOLOGY: Between July 2021 and February 2022, we interviewed Illinois residents who recently sought abortion care at ≤11 weeks of pregnancy. We also interviewed nine key informants with experience providing or billing for abortion or supporting insurance policy implementation in Illinois. We coded interview transcripts in Dedoose and developed code summaries to identify salient themes across interviews. RESULTS: Most participants insured by Illinois Medicaid or eligible for enrollment received full coverage for their abortions; most with private insurance did not and faced challenges learning about coverage status. Some opted not to use insurance, often citing privacy concerns. Participants who benefited from abortion coverage expressed relief, gave examples of other financial challenges they could prioritize, and described feeling in control of their abortion experience. Those without coverage described feeling stressed, uncertain, and constrained in their decision-making. CONCLUSION: When abortion was fully covered by insurance, it reduced financial burdens and enhanced reproductive autonomy. Illinois Medicaid policy-with seamless enrollment options and appropriate reimbursement rates-offers a model for improving abortion access in other states. Further investigation is needed to determine compliance among private insurance companies and increase transparency.

Pharmacists' experiences dispensing misoprostol and readiness to dispense mifepristone.

BACKGROUND: Mifepristone, followed by misoprostol, is commonly used for medication abortion and early miscarriage care. Since mifepristone's approval in 2000, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has placed restrictions on where and how it could be dispensed, including applying a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy in 2011. In December 2021, the FDA removed the in-person dispensing requirement and, in January 2023, began allowing certified pharmacies to dispense the drug directly to patients. OBJECTIVES: To explore pharmacist knowledge about misoprostol and mifepristone, experience dispensing misoprostol, as well as comfort and readiness to dispense mifepristone should federal regulations allow. METHODS: We conducted in-depth interviews with 21 U.S.-based pharmacists and pharmacy trainees between June and December of 2021, a time when few pharmacists were allowed to dispense mifepristone. RESULTS: Participants reported varied knowledge about medications for miscarriage and abortion but described themselves as generally knowledgeable about medications and reported strategies for learning about new medications. Most said they would feel ready to dispense mifepristone, and many described dispensing misoprostol without difficulty. Potential challenges specific to mifepristone dispensing included employer hesitation and colleague refusals. To assure successful dispensing, participants recommended basic training and fact sheets; relationships with prescribers for follow-up; and policies for prescription transfers in the event of refusal. CONCLUSIONS: We found that nearly all participants would feel ready to dispense mifepristone with some basic training. Pharmacists self-report having the skills and resources to learn about new medications quickly. Our findings support the FDA's rule change allowing pharmacist dispensing of mifepristone and suggest that most challenges would stem from individual or institutional refusals.

Leveraging the Tools Available: Using the Hyde Amendment to Preserve Minimum Abortion Access and Mitigate Harms in Restrictive States.

The overturn of Roe v. Wade has resulted in fewer rights and resources for people seeking abortion care, particularly in the South. The Hyde Amendment has historically restricted abortion access for those enrolled in Medicaid. We argue here that its guarantees of minimum abortion coverage should be leveraged to offset harms where possible.

Are Illinois Contraceptive Providers Comfortable Providing Care to Adolescents? Results From a Statewide Provider Needs Assessment.

OBJECTIVES: Legislation allows adolescents to access comprehensive contraceptive care; however, provider practices remain unclear. We examined predictors of provider knowledge and comfort surrounding the provision of contraceptive care to adolescents. METHODS: We mailed a survey to Illinois contraceptive providers (n = 251). Study outcomes include 1) knowledge of adolescent consent laws, 2) comfort asking for time alone with adolescents, 3) comfort providing contraception to adolescents without parental consent, and 4) comfort providing long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) to adolescents without parental consent. Using multivariable logistic regression, we estimated adjusted odds ratios (aORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: Most providers are knowledgeable of consent laws (90%) and report being comfortable asking for time alone with adolescents (94%) and comfortable providing contraception to adolescents without parental consent (88%). Having a large proportion of patients who are eligible for family planning services was associated with increased comfort asking for time alone with adolescents (aOR, 7.03; 95% CI, 1.58-31.3) and providing contraception to adolescents (aOR, 4.0; 95% CI, 1.4-11.1). Only one-half (54%) were comfortable providing LARC methods to adolescents, with higher comfort among providers who: received more than 2 days of formal family planning training (aOR, 2.77; 95% CI, 1.2-6.2), specialized in obstetrics-gynecology (aOR, 5.64; 95% CI, 2.1-15.1), and had a patient population with more than 50% patients from minoritized racial/ethnic groups (aOR, 2.9; 95% CI, 1.2-6.6). CONCLUSIONS: Although knowledge of consent laws was high, gaps remain. Only one-half of our sample indicated comfort with the provision of LARC methods without parental consent. Additional efforts to increase provider comfort with all contraceptive methods and training on adolescent-centered practices may be required to meet the needs of adolescent patients.

Telehealth for contraceptive care: Lessons from staff and clinicians for improving implementation and sustainability in Illinois.

Objective: To solicit Illinois staff and clinician perspectives on rapid implementation of telehealth for contraceptive counseling and recommendations to improve and sustain it in the long term. Study design: Researchers recruited and interviewed clinicians (n = 20) in primary care and obstetrics/gynecology clinics across 13 health care systems in Illinois, as well as clinicians (n = 11), leadership (n = 6) and staff (n = 7) from Planned Parenthood of Illinois clinics. Guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, we coded and analyzed interview transcripts in Dedoose with a focus on themes regarding steps to improve quality and sustainability of telehealth. Results: Participants expressed generally positive attitudes towards telehealth, noting that it increased access to care and time for patient education. Still, many highlighted areas of implementation that needed improvement. Clinic operations were complicated by gaps in telehealth training and the logistical needs of balancing telehealth and in-person appointments. Clinics had difficulty ensuring patient awareness of telehealth as an option for care, in addition to deficiencies with the telehealth technology itself. Finally, innovative resources for telehealth patients, while existent, have not been evenly offered across clinics. This includes the use of self-injection birth control, as well as providing medical equipment such as blood pressure cuffs in community settings. Some themes reflect issues specific to contraceptive counseling while others reflect issues with telehealth implementation in general, including confusion about reimbursement. Conclusion: Illinois contraceptive care providers and staff wish to sustain telehealth for the long term, while also recommending specific improvements to patient communications, clinic operations, and access to supportive resources. Implications: Our study highlights considerations for clinics to optimize implementation of telehealth services for contraceptive care. Providers described the value of clear workflows to balance in-person and telehealth visits, streamlined communications platforms, targeted patient outreach, training on providing virtual contraceptive care, and creative approaches to ensuring patient access to resources.

"This has definitely opened the doors": Provider perceptions of patient experiences with telemedicine for contraception in Illinois.

CONTEXT: The COVID-19 pandemic increased the provision of contraception through telemedicine. This qualitative study describes provider perceptions of how telemedicine provision of contraception has impacted patient care. METHODS: We interviewed 40 obstetrics-gynecology and family medicine physicians, midwives, nurse practitioners, and support staff providing contraception via telemedicine in practices across Illinois, including Planned Parenthood of Illinois (PPIL) health centers. We analyzed interview content to identify themes around the perceived impact of telemedicine implementation on contraception access, contraceptive counseling, patient privacy, and provision of long-acting reversible contraception (LARC). RESULTS: Participants perceived that telemedicine implementation improved care by increasing contraception access, increasing focus on counseling while reducing bias, and allowing easier method switching. Participants thought disparities in telemedicine usage and limitations to the technological interface presented barriers to patient care. Participants' perceptions of how telemedicine implementation impacts patient privacy and LARC provision were mixed. Some participants found telemedicine implementation enhanced privacy, while others felt unable to ensure privacy in a virtual space. Participants found telemedicine modalities useful for counseling patients considering methods of LARC, but they sometimes presented an unnecessary extra step for those sure about receiving one at a practice offering same day insertion. CONCLUSION: Providers felt telemedicine provision of contraception positively impacted patient care. Improvements to counseling and easier access to method switching suggest that telemedicine implementation may help reduce contraceptive coercion. Our findings highlight the need to integrate LARC care with telemedicine workflows, improve patient privacy protections, and promote equitable access to all telemedicine modalities.

Exploring Illinois contraceptive providers' interest in medication abortion training.

OBJECTIVES: To explore Illinois contraceptive providers' interest in medication abortion training. STUDY DESIGN: We surveyed Illinois contraceptive providers to explore associations between interest in medication abortion training and provider, practice, and patient variables. RESULTS: Of 1040 reachable, eligible contacts, 251 responded to the survey (24% response rate) and more than half (56%) expressed interest in medication abortion training. Providers with the highest interest in medication abortion training were those with <2 days' formal contraceptive training (n = 31; 76%) and those who received Title X funding (n = 32; 81%). CONCLUSION: Findings suggest interest in medication abortion training among Illinois contraceptive providers. IMPLICATIONS: Our findings suggest some contraceptive providers may be interested in training opportunities around medication abortion. More research is needed to understand whether additional training could increase the number of providers able to counsel, refer, and provide medication abortion.

Beyond Hobby Lobby: Employer's responsibilities and opportunities to improve network access to reproductive healthcare for employees.

The majority of United States (US) women age 15-49 have employer-sponsored health insurance, but these insurance plans fall short if employees cannot find providers who meet reproductive health needs. Employers could and should do more to facilitate and advocate for their employees through the insurance plans they sponsor. We conducted interviews with 14 key informants to understand how large United States employers see their role in health insurance benefits, especially when it comes to reproductive health care access and restrictions in religious health systems. Our findings suggest that large employers wish to be responsive to their employees' health insurance priorities and have leverage to improve access to reproductive health services, but they do not take sufficient action toward this end. In particular, we argue that large employers could pressure insurance carriers to address network gaps in care resulting from religious restrictions and require insurers to treat out-of-network providers like in-network providers when reproductive care is restricted.

Provider and community stakeholder perspectives of expanding Medicaid coverage of abortion in Illinois.

BACKGROUND: Many people seeking abortion encounter financial difficulties that delay or prevent them from accessing care. Although some patients qualify for Medicaid (a public program that can help cover health care costs), laws in some states restrict the use of Medicaid for abortion care. In 2017, Illinois passed House Bill 40 (HB-40), which allowed patients with Medicaid to receive coverage for their abortion. This study aimed to understand how HB-40 affected abortion affordability from the perspectives of individuals that work directly or indirectly with abortion patients or facilities providing abortion care. METHODS: We conducted interviews with clinicians and administrators from facilities that provided abortion services; staff from organizations that provided resources to abortion providers or patients; and individuals at organizations involved in the passage and/or implementation of HB-40. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. We created codes based on the interview guides, coded each transcript using the web application Dedoose, and summarized findings by code. RESULTS: Interviews were conducted with 38 participants. Participants reflected that HB-40 seemed to remove a significant financial barrier for Medicaid recipients and improve the experience for patients seeking abortion care. Participants also described how the law led to a shift in resource allocation, allowing financial support to be directed towards uninsured patients. Some participants thought HB-40 might contribute to a reduction in abortion stigma. Despite the perceived positive impacts of the law, participants noted a lack of public knowledge about HB-40, as well as confusing or cumbersome insurance-related processes, could diminish the law's impact. Participants also highlighted persisting barriers to abortion utilization for minors, recent and undocumented immigrants, and people residing in rural areas, even after the passage of HB-40. CONCLUSIONS: HB-40 was perceived to improve the affordability of abortion. However, participants identified additional obstacles to abortion care in Illinois that weakened the impact of HB-40 for patients and required further action, Findings suggest that policymakers must also consider how insurance coverage can be disrupted by other legal barriers for historically excluded populations and ensure clear information on Medicaid enrollment and abortion coverage is widely disseminated.

What you don't know can hurt you: Patient and provider perspectives on postpartum contraceptive care in Illinois Catholic Hospitals.

OBJECTIVE: Catholic Religious and Ethical Directives restrict access to contraception; yet offering contraception during a delivery hospitalization facilitates birth spacing and is a convenient option for patients during the postpartum period. We assessed patient and provider experiences with hospital transparency around postpartum contraceptive care in Illinois Catholic Hospitals. STUDY DESIGN: We interviewed 44 participants with experience in Illinois Catholic Hospitals: 21 patients, and 23 providers, including clinicians, nurses, doulas, and postpartum program staff. We used an open-ended interview approach, with a semistructured guide focused on postpartum contraceptive care. We conducted interviews by phone between November 2019 and June 2020. We audio-recorded interviews, transcribed them verbatim, and coded transcripts in Dedoose. We developed narrative memos for each code, identifying themes and subthemes. We organized these in a matrix for analysis and present here themes regarding hospital transparency that emerged across interviews. RESULTS: Many patients knew they were delivering in a Catholic hospital; however, few were aware that Catholic policies limited their health care options. Patients expressed a desire for hospitals to be transparent, even "very vocal," about religious restrictions and described consequences of restrictions on patient care. Patients lacked information to make contraceptive decisions, experienced limits on or delays in care, and some lost continuity with trusted providers. Consequences for providers included moral distress in trying to provide care using workarounds such as documenting false medical diagnoses. CONCLUSIONS: Religious restrictions on postpartum contraception restrict access, cause unnecessary delays in care, and lead to misdiagnosis and marginalization of contraceptive care. Restrictions also cause moral distress to providers who balance career repercussions and professional integrity with patient needs. IMPLICATIONS: To protect patient autonomy, especially during the vulnerable postpartum period, Catholic hospitals should increase transparency regarding limitations on reproductive health care. Insurers and policy-makers should guarantee that patients have the option to receive care at hospitals without these limitations and facilitate public education about what to expect at Catholic facilities.

Reproductive healthcare denials among a privately insured population.

This study aimed to quantify and examine reproductive healthcare denials experienced by individuals receiving employer-sponsored health insurance. We conducted a national cross-sectional survey using probability and non-probability-based panels from December 2019-January 2020. Eligible respondents were adults employed by any Standard and Poor's 500 company, who received employer-sponsored health insurance. Respondents (n = 1,001) reported whether anyone on their healthcare plan had been denied a reproductive healthcare service in the past five years and details about their denials. We conducted bivariate analyses and multiple logistic regression to estimate factors associated with denials. Eleven percent of respondents (14% of women; 10% of men) reported a denial. Compared to lower-income respondents, those with income ≥ $50,000/year were less likely to experience a denial (aOR = 0.53; 95% CI 0.29-0.97). Compared to respondents who were never married, being married (aOR = 2.33; 95% CI: 1.03-5.30) or cohabiting (aOR = 2.43; 95% CI: 1.03-5.72) significantly increased odds of experiencing a denial. In 38% of cases the patient learned of the denial at a scheduled visit, while 23% learned in an emergency setting, and 13% after the encounter. Individuals covered by employer-sponsored health insurance continue to be denied coverage of preventive services. Employers and insurers can facilitate access to reproductive healthcare by ensuring that their plans include comprehensive coverage and in-network providers offer comprehensive services.

Lessons learned: Illinois providers' perspectives on implementation of Medicaid coverage for abortion.

OBJECTIVE: On January 1, 2018, Illinois became the first Midwestern state to cover abortion care for Medicaid enrollees. This study describes state implementation of the policy, the impact on abortion providers, and lessons learned. STUDY DESIGN: We documented abortion providers' perspectives on the service delivery consequences of Medicaid coverage for abortion in Illinois. We conducted in-depth interviews with clinicians and administrators (N = 23) from 15 Illinois clinics, including clinics that provided other services and those primarily providing abortion. We conducted interviews in person or by phone between April and October 2019. They lasted ≤100 minutes, were audio-recorded, transcribed, and coded in Dedoose. We developed code summaries to identify salient themes across interviews. RESULTS: All participants supported the law and expected benefits to patients. Many struggled to implement the policy because of difficulties obtaining certification to bill the state Medicaid program, confusing and cumbersome paperwork requirements, reimbursement delays, confusing claim denials, and uncertain protocols for Medicaid patients covered under the exceptions defined by the Hyde Amendment. Nearly all participants expressed concern that low reimbursement rates were insufficient to cover costs. Implementation was easier for multiservice clinics and those nested in larger institutions. Several clinics closed during implementation; one clinic opened. Clinics leveraged internal resources, external funding, and technical assistance to ensure that Medicaid enrollees could receive care without costs. CONCLUSIONS: Implementing Medicaid coverage for abortion requires proactive and responsive state institutions, improvements to reimbursement processes, and adequate reimbursement rates. In Illinois, successful implementation depended on clinic adaptability, external support, and advocacy. IMPLICATIONS: Our research suggests that successful, sustainable implementation of Medicaid coverage for abortion depends on state policies that allow clinics to enroll patients, process claims in 30 to 90 days, and receive reimbursements covering the cost of care. Without these measures, ensuring immediate patient access may depend upon clinics mobilizing resources and external transitional support.

"My Hands Are Tied": Abortion Restrictions and Providers' Experiences in Religious and Nonreligious Health Care Systems.

CONTEXT: Abortion is generally prohibited in Catholic hospitals, but less is known about abortion restrictions in other religiously affiliated health care facilities. As religiously affiliated health systems expand in the United States, it is important to understand how religious restrictions affect the practices of providers who treat pregnant patients. METHODS: From September 2016 to May 2018, in-depth interviews were conducted with 31 key informants (clinical providers, ethicists, chaplains and health system administrators) with experience working in secular, Protestant or Catholic health care systems in Illinois. A thematic content approach was used to identify themes related to participants' experiences with abortion policies, the role of ethics committees, the impact on patient care and conflicts with hospital policies. RESULTS: Few limitations on abortion were reported in secular hospitals, while Catholic hospitals prohibited most abortions, and a Protestant-affiliated system banned abortions deemed "elective." Religiously affiliated hospitals allowed abortions in specific cases, if approved through an ethics consultation. Interpretation of system-wide policies varied by hospital, with some indication that institutional discomfort with abortion influenced policy as much as religious teachings did. Providers constrained by religious restrictions referred or transferred patients desiring abortion, including for pregnancy complications, with those in Protestant hospitals having more latitude to directly refer such patients. As a result of religiously influenced policies, patients could encounter delays, financial obstacles, restrictions on treatment and stigmatization. CONCLUSIONS: Patients seeking abortion or presenting with pregnancy complications at Catholic and Protestant hospitals may encounter more delays and fewer treatment options than they would at secular hospitals. More research is needed to better understand the implications for women's access to reproductive health care.

"Am I Going to Be in Trouble for What I'm Doing?": Providing Contraceptive Care in Religious Health Care Systems.

CONTEXT: Catholic systems control a growing share of health care in the United States. Because patients seeking contraceptives in Catholic facilities face doctrinal restrictions that may affect access to and quality of care, it is important to understand whether and how providers work within and around institutional policies regarding contraception. METHODS: In 2016-2018, in-depth interviews were conducted in Illinois with 28 key informants-including providers (obstetrician-gynecologists, other physicians, nurse-midwives) and nonclinical professionals (ethicists, administrators, chaplains)-who had experience in secular, Protestant or Catholic health care systems. Interviews addressed multiple aspects of reproductive care and hospital and system policy. A thematic content approach was used to identify themes related to participants' experiences with and perspectives on contraceptive care. RESULTS: While respondents working in secular and Protestant systems reported few limitations on contraceptive care, those working in Catholic systems reported multiple barriers. Providers who had worked in Catholic systems described variable institutional policies and enforcement practices, ranging from verbal admonishments to lease agreements prohibiting contraceptive provision in secular clinics on church-owned land. Despite these restrictions, patients' needs motivated many providers to utilize work-arounds; some providers reported having been pressured or directly instructed to document false diagnoses in patients' medical records. Interviewees described how these obstacles burdened patients, especially those with social and financial constraints, and resulted in delayed or lower quality care. CONCLUSIONS: Providers working in Catholic hospitals are limited in their ability to serve women of reproductive age. Work-arounds intended to circumvent restrictions may inadvertently stigmatize contraception and negatively affect patient care.

Family planning service provision in Illinois religious hospitals: Racial/ethnic variation in access to non-religious hospitals for publicly insured women.

OBJECTIVES: To identify religious affiliations of hospitals and access to family planning (FP) care available to publicly insured women in Cook County, Illinois. DESIGN: We analyzed Illinois public insurance enrollment data and family planning service claims (2015-2018) for women 18-45. RESULTS: Eighty-five percent of Black/Hispanic women were enrolled in Medicaid managed care plans with a higher percentage of Catholic healthcare than Cook County as a whole compared to 75% of White women (p<0.0001). There were fewer FP services at Catholic (IRR 0.072, 95% CI 0.068-0.076) and Christian non-Catholic (IRR 0.55, 95% CI 0.53-0.56) compared to non-religious hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: Medicaid managed care plans may restrict family planning care by limiting patients to religious hospitals.

Well-woman Care Barriers and Facilitators of Low-income Women Obtaining Induced Abortion after the Affordable Care Act.

OBJECTIVES: This study uses the abortion visit as an opportunity to identify women lacking well-woman care (WWC) and explores factors influencing their ability to obtain WWC after implementation of the Affordable Care Act. METHODS: We conducted semistructured interviews with low-income women presenting for induced abortion who lacked a well-woman visit in more than 12 months or a regular health care provider. Dimensions explored included 1) pre-abortion experiences seeking WWC, 2) postabortion plans for obtaining WWC, and 3) perceived barriers and facilitators to obtaining WWC. Interviews were transcribed and analyzed using ATLAS.ti. RESULTS: Thirty-four women completed interviews; three-quarters were insured. Women described interacting psychosocial, interpersonal, and structural barriers hindering WWC use. Psychosocial barriers included negative health care experiences, low self-efficacy, and not prioritizing personal health. Women's caregiver roles were the primary interpersonal barrier. Most prominently, structural challenges, including insurance insecurity, disruptions in patient-provider relationships, and logistical issues, were significant barriers. Perceived facilitators included online insurance procurement, care integration, and social support. CONCLUSIONS: Despite most being insured, participants encountered WWC barriers after implementation of the Affordable Care Act. Further work is needed to identify and engage women lacking preventive reproductive health care.

Whose Choice? Developing a Unifying Ethical Framework for Conscience Laws in Health Care.

Since abortion became legal nationwide, federal and state "conscience clauses" have been established to define the context in which health professionals may decline to participate in contested services. Patients and health care providers may act according to conscience in making health care decisions and in deciding whether to abstain from or to participate in contested services. Historically, however, conscience clauses largely have equated conscience in health care with provider abstinence from such services. We propose a framework to analyze the ethical implications of conscience laws. There is a rich literature on the exercise of conscience in the clinical encounter. This essay addresses the need to ensure that policy, too, is grounded in an ethical framework. We argue that the ideal law meets three standards: it protects patients' exercise of conscience, it safeguards health care providers' rights of conscience, and it does not contradict standards of ethical conduct established by professional societies. We have chosen Illinois as a test of our framework because it has one of the nation's broadest conscience clauses and because an amendment to ensure that women receive consistent access to contested services has just passed in the state legislature. Without such an amendment, Illinois law fails all three standards of our framework. If signed by the governor, the amended law will provide protections for patients' positive claims of conscience. We recommend further protections for providers' positive claims as well. Enacting such changes would offer a model for how ethics-based analysis could be applied to similar policies nationwide.

Prevalence and Correlates of Having a Regular Physician among Women Presenting for Induced Abortion.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the prevalence and correlates of having a regular physician among women presenting for induced abortion. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of women presenting to an urban, university-based family planning clinic for abortion between January 2008 and September 2011. We conducted bivariate analyses, comparing women with and without a regular physician, and multivariable regression modeling, to identify factors associated with not having a regular physician. RESULTS: Of 834 women, 521 (62.5%) had a regular physician and 313 (37.5%) did not. Women with a prior pregnancy, live birth, or spontaneous abortion were more likely than women without these experiences to have a regular physician. Women with a prior induced abortion were not more likely than women who had never had a prior induced abortion to have a regular physician. Compared with women younger than 18 years, women aged 18 to 26 years were less likely to have a physician (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.25; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.10-0.62). Women with a prior live birth had increased odds of having a regular physician compared with women without a prior pregnancy (aOR, 1.89; 95% CI, 1.13-3.16). Women without medical/fetal indications and who had not been victims of sexual assault (self-indicated) were less likely to report having a regular physician compared with women with medical/fetal indications (aOR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.17-0.82). CONCLUSIONS: The abortion visit is a point of contact with a large number of women without a regular physician and therefore provides an opportunity to integrate women into health care.