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.

Telemedicine for the provision of medication abortion to pregnant people at up to twelve weeks of pregnancy: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Telemedicine represents an important strategy to facilitate access to medication abortion (MAB) procedures, reduces distance barriers and expands coverage to underserved communities. The aim is evaluating the self-managed MAB (provided through telemedicine as the sole intervention or in comparison to in-person care) in pregnant people at up to 12 weeks of pregnancy. METHODS: A literature search was conducted using electronic databases: MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane (Central Register of Controlled Trials and Database of Systematic Reviews), LILACS, SciELO, and Google Scholar. The search was based on the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome, and Study Design (PICOS) framework, and was not restricted to any years of publication, and studies could be published in English or Spanish. Study screening and selection, risk of bias assessment, and data extraction were performed by peer reviewers. Risk of bias was evaluated with RoB 2.0 and ROBIS-I. A narrative and descriptive synthesis of the results was conducted. Meta-analyses with random-effects models were performed using Review Manager version 5.4 to calculate pooled risk differences, along with their individual 95% confidence intervals. The rate of evidence certainty was based on GRADE recommendations. RESULTS: 21 articles published between 2011 and 2022 met the inclusion criteria. Among them, 20 were observational studies, and 1 was a randomized clinical trial. Regarding the risk of bias, 5 studies had a serious risk, 15 had a moderate risk, and 1 had an undetermined risk. In terms of the type of intervention, 7 compared telemedicine to standard care. The meta-analysis of effectiveness revealed no statistically significant differences between the two modalities of care (RD = 0.01; 95%CI 0.00, 0.02). Our meta-analyses show that there were no significant differences in the occurrence of adverse events or in patient satisfaction when comparing the two methods of healthcare delivery. CONCLUSION: Telemedicine is an effective and viable alternative for MAB, similar to standard care. The occurrence of complications was low in both forms of healthcare delivery. Telemedicine services are an opportunity to expand access to safe abortion services.

Self-diagnosing the end of pregnancy after medication abortion.

This qualitative study conducted between November 2020 and March 2021 in the US state of Mississippi examines the experiences of 25 people who obtained medication abortion at the state's only abortion facility. We conducted in-depth interviews with participants after their abortions until concept saturation was reached, and then analysed the content using inductive and deductive analysis. We assessed how people use embodied knowledge about their individual physical experiences such as pregnancy symptoms, a missed period, bleeding, and visual examinations of pregnancy tissue to identify the beginning and end of pregnancy. We compared this to how people use biomedical knowledge such as pregnancy tests, ultrasounds, and clinical examinations to confirm their self-diagnoses. We found that most people felt confident that they could identify the beginning and end of pregnancy through embodied knowledge, especially when combined with the use of home pregnancy tests that confirmed their symptoms, experiences, and visual evidence. All participants concerned about symptoms sought follow-up care at a medical facility, whereas people who felt confident of the successful end of the pregnancy did so less often. These findings have implications for settings of restricted abortion access that have limited options for follow-up care after medication abortion.

Virtual Clinic Telehealth Abortion Services in the United States One Year After Dobbs: Landscape Review.

BACKGROUND: Telehealth abortion has taken on a vital role in maintaining abortion access since the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization Supreme Court decision. However, little remains known about the landscape of new telehealth-only virtual clinic abortion providers that have expanded since telehealth abortion first became widely available in the United States in 2021. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to (1) document the landscape of telehealth-only virtual clinic abortion care in the United States, (2) describe changes in the presence of virtual clinic abortion services between September 2022, following the Dobbs decision, and June 2023, and (3) identify structural factors that may perpetuate inequities in access to virtual clinic abortion care. METHODS: We conducted a repeated cross-sectional study by reviewing web search results and abortion directories to identify virtual abortion clinics in September 2022 and June 2023 and described changes in the presence of virtual clinics between these 2 periods. In June 2023, we also described each virtual clinic's policies, including states served, costs, patient age limits, insurance acceptance, financial assistance available, and gestational limits. RESULTS: We documented 11 virtual clinics providing telehealth abortion care in 26 states and Washington DC in September 2022. By June 2023, 20 virtual clinics were providing services in 27 states and Washington DC. Most (n=16) offered care to minors, 8 provided care until 10 weeks of pregnancy, and median costs were US $259. In addition, 2 accepted private insurance and 1 accepted Medicaid, within a limited number of states. Most (n=16) had some form of financial assistance available. CONCLUSIONS: Virtual clinic abortion providers have proliferated since the Dobbs decision. We documented inequities in the availability of telehealth abortion care from virtual clinics, including age restrictions that exclude minors, gestational limits for care, and limited insurance and Medicaid acceptance. Notably, virtual clinic abortion care was not permitted in 11 states where in-person abortion is available.

The woman is the active agent: General practitioners and the agentive displacement of abortion in Ireland.

After the legalization of abortion in 2018, Ireland needed clinicians to become abortion providers and make this political win a medical reality. Yet Irish doctors had next-to-no training in abortion care, and barriers ranging from stigma to economic pressures in the healthcare system impacted doctors' desire to volunteer. How did hundreds of Irish doctors make the shift from family doctor to abortion provider? Drawing on ethnographic research conducted between 2017 and 2020, this article explores the process by which Irish general practitioners became abortion providers, attending to the material impact of medical technologies on that journey. Drawing from medical anthropologists who have examined similar themes of agency, pharmaceuticals, and medico-legal frameworks within the topic of assisted dying, I build on Anita Hannig's idea of "agentive displacement" to frame the productive impact of abortion pills on this transition.

Medical termination of pregnancy: people's expectations and experiences in the Netherlands.

PURPOSE: Annually, approximately 31,000 people experience a termination of pregnancy (TOP) in the Netherlands. In 2021, about one-third of them chose medical termination of pregnancy (MTOP). We explored experiences with MTOP and to what extent expectations, pain, and counselling in the clinic are associated with satisfaction with MTOP. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted using an online questionnaire. We included 138 respondents, ≥16 years, who chose MTOP (September 2020-March 2022). RESULTS: The majority of respondents experienced MTOP more positively than expected or as expected (67%). For 24%, the experience was more negative than expected. In the event of another TOP, half of these respondents would hesitate to choose or would not choose MTOP, mainly due to physical side effects. The majority of respondents (73%) would choose MTOP again. Their main motivation was self-determination during treatment. Respondents cited four key elements: pain, intensity of experience during and after treatment, blood loss, and duration. Correspondence between MTOP expectations and experiences was associated with satisfaction with MTOP, while pain and satisfaction with counselling were not. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of respondents were satisfied with MTOP and would choose the treatment again. Non-correspondence between expectations and experiences negatively affected satisfaction with MTOP. This highlights the importance of managing expectations by providing accessible information about the variety in expectations and experiences to patients with a focus on key elements of the experience.

The majority experienced the abortion pill more positively than expected or as expected. Four experience elements are key: pain, intensity during and after treatment, blood loss, duration. Information about these elements is crucial since non-correspondence of expectation and experience negatively affects satisfaction.

Society of Family Planning Clinical Recommendation: Medication abortion between 14 0/7 and 27 6/7 weeks of gestation: Jointly developed with the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine.

The objective of this Clinical Recommendation is to review relevant literature and provide evidence-based recommendations for medication abortion between 14 0/7 and 27 6/7 weeks of gestation, with a focus on mifepristone-misoprostol and misoprostol-only regimens. We systematically reviewed PubMed articles published between 2008 and 2022 and reviewed reference lists of included articles to identify additional publications. See Search Strategy for more details. Several randomized trials of medication abortion between 14 0/7 and 27 6/7 weeks of gestation demonstrate that mifepristone 200 mg orally before misoprostol increases effectiveness (complete abortion at 24 or 48 hours) compared to misoprostol only. Studies continue to evaluate different doses, routes, and dosing intervals for misoprostol. If mifepristone is unavailable, several misoprostol regimens with individual doses of at least 200 mcg or more are effective. Adjunctive osmotic dilators are of limited benefit. It is important to individualize care, with consideration to reducing misoprostol dose in low-resource settings or at 24 0/7 weeks of gestation or later (or equivalent uterine size). Misoprostol in the setting of two or more previous cesarean sections is associated with increased risk of uterine rupture compared to one or none, but risk remains low. Most contraceptives can be started during or immediately following abortion. Appropriately trained and credentialed advanced practice clinicians can provide medication abortion between 14 0/7 and 27 6/7 weeks of gestation with appropriate backup within the confines of local regulations and licensure.

Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine Special Statement: Telemedicine in obstetrics-quality and safety considerations.

The frequency of telemedicine encounters has increased dramatically in recent years. This review summarizes the literature regarding the safety and quality of telemedicine for pregnancy-related services, including prenatal care, postpartum care, diabetes mellitus management, medication abortion, lactation support, hypertension management, genetic counseling, ultrasound examination, contraception, and mental health services. For many of these, telemedicine has several potential or proven benefits, including expanded patient access, improved patient satisfaction, decreased disparities in care delivery, and health outcomes at least comparable to those of traditional in-person encounters. Considering these benefits, it is suggested that payers should reimburse providers at least as much for telemedicine as for in-person services. Areas for future research are considered.

Decreasing reproductive and abortion care barriers: findings on the student health center's role from a student survey.

BACKGROUND: College-aged young adults in the US have low utilization and high need for reproductive healthcare. Multiple barriers to reproductive care exist. University Student Health Centers (SHCs) provide varying degrees of reproductive products and services. Recently, California legislated that public university SHCs add medication abortion to their care. METHODS: To examine existing attitudes and barriers to reproductive healthcare for public university students, we conducted an anonymous online survey at a large, diverse, urban coastal California State University. Students were asked about numerous barriers accessing reproductive services in general and at the SHC, which we categorized into three groups: stigma, access and system. Respondents were also asked about knowledge and preferences for accessing and recommending various services. To understand the extent to which inequities exist, we compared differences across racialized/ethnic identity, gender identity, anticipated degree, and living distance from campus using chi-squared tests. RESULTS: The majority of survey (n = 273) respondents experienced stigma and access barriers in general healthcare settings which made obtaining reproductive healthcare for themselves or their partners difficult (stigma barriers 55%; 95% CI 49%-61%; access barriers 68%; 95% CI 62-73%). Notably, students reported statistically significant lower rates of access barriers at the SHC, 50%, than in general reproductive healthcare settings, 68%. There were limited differences by student demographics. Students also reported a high willingness to use or recommend the SHC for pregnancy tests (73%; 95% CI 67-78%), emergency contraception pills (72%; 95% CI 66-78%) and medication abortion (60%; 95% CI 54-66%). Students were less likely to know where to access medication abortion compared to other services, suggesting unmet need. CONCLUSIONS: Our study provides evidence that students face barriers accessing reproductive healthcare and that SHCs are a trusted and accessible source of this care. SHCs have a key role in increasing health, academic and gender equity in the post-Roe era. Attention and financial support must be paid to SHCs to ensure success as state legislatures mandate them to expand reproductive and abortion care access.

A qualitative analysis of pharmacists' attitudes towards provision of medication abortion.

BACKGROUND: 90% of United States' counties do not have a single clinic offering abortion care, and barriers to care disproportionately affect low-income families. Novel models of abortion care delivery, including provision of medication abortion in pharmacies, with pharmacists prescribing medication, have the potential to expand access to abortion care. Pharmacists are well-positioned to independently provide abortion care and are highly accessible to patients, however medication abortion provision by pharmacists is not currently legal or available in the United States. To assess the potential acceptability of pharmacist provision of medication abortion and to identify anticipated barriers and facilitators to this model of care, we explored pharmacists' attitudes towards providing medication abortion, inclusive of patient selection, counseling, and medication prescribing. METHODS: From May to October 2021, we conducted 20 semi-structured qualitative interviews with pharmacists across the United States, guided by the domains of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Science Research. RESULTS: Major themes included there is a need for pharmacist provision of medication abortion and pharmacists perceive provision of medication abortion to be potentially acceptable if anticipated barriers are addressed. Anticipated barriers identified included personal, religious, and political beliefs of pharmacists and lack of space and systems to support the model. Ensuring adequate staffing with pharmacists willing to participate, private space, time for counseling, safe follow-up, training, and reimbursement mechanisms were perceived strategies to facilitate successful implementation. CONCLUSIONS: Pharmacist identified implementation strategies are needed to reduce anticipated barriers to pharmacist provision of medication abortion.

Social connectedness and supported self-management of early medication abortion in the UK: experiences from the COVID-19 pandemic and learning for the future.

Medication abortion has been established globally as safe and effective. This modality has increased accessibility and the opportunity to centre individual autonomy at the heart of abortion care, by facilitating self-managed abortion. Previous research has shown how self-managed abortion is beneficial in myriad settings ranging from problematic to (relatively) unproblematic contexts of access. In this paper we explore the relationship between self-management and sources of support (including health professionals, family, and friends); as well as considering issues of reproductive control and autonomy. Drawing on qualitative, experience-centred interviews, we utilise the concept of social connectedness to examine how supported self-managed abortion was experienced in the United Kingdom during the COVID-19 pandemic. Overall, self-management was welcomed, with participants speaking positively about managing their own abortion at home. However, a sense of connectedness was crucial in helping participants deal with difficult experiences; and functioned to support individual autonomy in self-care. This paper is the first to examine factors of connection, support, and isolation, as experienced by those undergoing self-managed abortion in the UK in detail. Our research suggests a continued need to advocate for high quality support for self-managed abortion, as well as for choice of abortion method, to support patient-centered care.

History and Politics of Medication Abortion in the United States and the Rise of Telemedicine and Self-Managed Abortion.

This article examines the decades-long campaign to increase access to abortion pills in the United States, including advocates' work to win US Food and Drug Administration approval of mifepristone and misoprostol for abortion, the continuing restrictions on mifepristone, and the multiple strategies advocates have pursued to challenge these restrictions, including lobbying the FDA to remove the restrictions, obtaining a limited research exemption from FDA restrictions, and suing the FDA during the COVID-19 pandemic. The article pays particular attention to the influence of research conducted on the safety and efficacy of medication abortion as well as research on the impact of increased availability of abortion pills through telemedicine during the pandemic. The article also addresses self-managed abortion, wherein people obtain and use mifepristone and/or misoprostol outside the formal health care system, and it documents the growing network of organizations providing logistical, medical, and legal support to people self-managing abortion. The article concludes with reflections on the role abortion pills might play in the post-Roe era amid increasingly divergent abortion access trends across different regions of the United States.

Provider Mistrust and Telemedicine Abortion Care Preferences Among Patients in Ohio, West Virginia, and Kentucky.

Objectives: The convenience and privacy provided by telemedicine medication abortion may make this service preferable to patients who mistrust their abortion provider. We assessed associations between mistrust in the abortion provider and preferences for telemedicine abortion. Study Design: From April 2020 to April 2021, we surveyed patients seeking abortion in Ohio, West Virginia, and Kentucky. Using unconditional logistic regression models, we examined unadjusted and adjusted associations between mistrust in the abortion provider and preferences for telemedicine abortion among all participants, and among only participants undergoing medication abortion. Results: Of 1,218 patients who met inclusion criteria, 546 used medication abortion services. Just more than half (56%) of all participants and many (64%) of medication abortion participants preferred telemedicine services. Only 6% of medication abortion participants received telemedicine medication dispensing services. Only 1.4% of all participants and 1% of medication abortion participants mistrusted the abortion provider. Participants who mistrusted the abortion provider were somewhat more likely to prefer telemedicine abortion (unadjusted odds ratio [OR]: 2.5, 95% CI: 0.8-7.9; adjusted OR: 2.9, 95% CI: 0.9-9), and medication abortion participants who mistrusted the abortion provider were also somewhat more likely to prefer telemedicine abortion (unadjusted OR: 3.5, 95% CI: 0.4-28.9; adjusted OR: 5.0, 95% CI: 0.6-43), although these associations were not statistically significant. Conclusions: In three abortion-restrictive states, most patients expressed preferences for telemedicine abortion, but few accessed them. Provider mistrust was rare, but those experiencing mistrust trended toward preferring telemedicine services. Telemedicine may improve access to abortion services for patients experiencing medical mistrust.

Documenting activism and advocacy around medication abortion in Central, East, and West Africa.

Medication abortion, a safe and effective method for terminating pregnancy in the first and second trimester, can reduce overall maternal mortality. However, little is known about how advocates for abortion view medication abortion in their communities, particularly where abortion is legally restricted. We conducted in-depth interviews (2018-2019; N=24) with health workers and community leaders in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Kenya, Nigeria, Malawi, and Tanzania identified from the Mobilizing Activists Around Medication Abortion (MAMA) network. Interviews focused on the role of advocacy in medication abortion provision. Participants identified benefits of medication abortion to women, including privacy, accessibility, and safety, and community benefits, including perceived reduction in maternal mortality. Participants described challenges to providing support for medication abortion, including difficulties operating in legally restrictive environments and stigma. Findings highlight the role of grassroots advocacy to overcome challenges and provide an alternative model of abortion access and care to women.

Mifepristone Antagonization with Progesterone to Avert Medication Abortion: A Scoping Review.

The safety and efficacy of mifepristone antagonization with progesterone to avert medication abortion, also known as abortion pill rescue, is a subject of vigorous debate. Two prominent medical associations have taken positions that either entirely reject or fully support its use. This scoping review aimed to gain insight into the safety and efficacy of its use. Analysis of 16 studies showed that the continuing pregnancy rate after ingesting mifepristone alone is ≦25 percent for gestational ages ≦49 days. Analysis of four studies showed that two-thirds of the women who changed their minds and received progesterone after initiating their medication abortion with mifepristone could safely continue their pregnancies. There is no increased maternal or fetal risk from using bioidentical progesterone in early pregnancy. If a woman has already taken mifepristone for her medication abortion and then changes her mind, timely supplementation with progesterone may allow her pregnancy to continue. The conclusion that mifepristone antagonization with progesterone is a safe and effective treatment has implications for medication abortion informed consent. Summary: Two-thirds of the women who changed their minds and received progesterone after initiating their medication abortion with mifepristone could safely continue their pregnancies. If a woman has already taken mifepristone for her medication abortion and then changes her mind, timely supplementation with progesterone may allow her pregnancy to continue. Physicians should disclose this treatment option to their patients at the time of informed consent.

Self-Managed Medication Abortion: Implications for Clinical Practice.

Medication abortion represents more than 50 percent of abortions in the United States (US). Since its approval in the US in 2000, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has progressively relaxed the prescribing requirements such that currently, no office visit, in-person dispensing, or ultrasound is required. Obtaining medication for abortion online without medical supervision or evaluation is also possible. This article reviews the complications of medication abortion by examining major studies and delineates the risks specific to self-managed abortion to inform clinicians in caring for women. Summary: Medication abortion has become the most common abortion method in the United States. This document provides a detailed history of the relaxation requirements on medication abortion and reviews the major studies on medication abortion complications including a discussion of their limitations. Finally, the paper delineates the ease of access to medication abortion without a health care provider and the risks associated with self-managed abortion. This paper is intended to provide information for clinicians who likely will be encountering increasing number of patients with such complications.

Accuracy of self-assessment of gestational duration among people seeking abortion.

BACKGROUND: Mifepristone, used together with misoprostol, is approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration for medication abortion through 10 weeks' gestation. Although in-person ultrasound is frequently used to establish medication abortion eligibility, previous research demonstrates that people seeking abortion early in pregnancy can accurately self-assess gestational duration using the date of their last menstrual period. OBJECTIVE: In this study, we establish the screening performance of a broader set of questions for self-assessment of gestational duration among a sample of people seeking abortion at a wide range of gestations. STUDY DESIGN: We surveyed patients seeking abortion at 7 facilities before ultrasound and compared self-assessments of gestational duration using 11 pregnancy dating questions with measurements on ultrasound. For individual pregnancy dating questions and combined questions, we established screening performance focusing on metrics of diagnostic accuracy, defined as the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, sensitivity (or the proportion of ineligible participants who correctly screened as ineligible for medication abortion), and proportion of false negatives (ie, the proportion of all participants who erroneously screened as eligible for medication abortion). We tested for differences in sensitivity across individual and combined questions using McNemar's test, and for differences in accuracy using the area under the receiver operating curve and Sidak adjusted P values. RESULTS: One-quarter (25%) of 1089 participants had a gestational duration of >70 days on ultrasound. Using the date of last menstrual period alone demonstrated 83.5% sensitivity (95% confidence interval, 78.4-87.9) in identifying participants with gestational durations of >70 days on ultrasound, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.82 (95% confidence interval, 0.79-0.85) and a proportion of false negatives of 4.0%. A composite measure of responses to questions on number of weeks pregnant, date of last menstrual period, and date they got pregnant demonstrated 89.1% sensitivity (95% confidence interval, 84.7-92.6) and an area under the receiver operating curve of 0.86 (95% confidence interval, 0.83-0.88), with 2.7% of false negatives. A simpler question set focused on being >10 weeks or >2 months pregnant or having missed 2 or more periods had comparable sensitivity (90.7%; 95% confidence interval, 86.6-93.9) and proportion of false negatives (2.3%), but with a slightly lower area under the receiver operating curve (0.82; 95% confidence interval, 0.79-0.84). CONCLUSION: In a sample representative of people seeking abortion nationally, broadening the screening questions for assessing gestational duration beyond the date of the last menstrual period resulted in improved accuracy and sensitivity of self-assessment at the 70-day threshold for medication abortion. Ultrasound assessment for medication abortion may not be necessary, especially when requiring ultrasound could increase COVID-19 risk or healthcare costs, restrict access, or limit patient choice.

Remote Delivery in Reproductive Health Care: Operation of Direct-to-Patient Telehealth Medication Abortion Services in Diverse Settings.

PURPOSE: Established models of reproductive health service delivery were disrupted by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. This study examines rapid innovation of remote abortion service operations across health care settings and describes the use of telehealth consultations with medications delivered directly to patients. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 21 clinical staff from 4 practice settings: family planning clinics, online medical services, and primary care practices-independent or within multispecialty health systems. Clinicians and administrators described their telehealth abortion services. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed. Staff roles, policies, and procedures were compared across practice settings. RESULTS: Across all practice settings, telehealth abortion services consisted of 5 operational steps: patient engagement, care consultations, payment, medication dispensing, and follow-up communication. Online services and independent primary care practices used asynchronous methods to determine eligibility and complete consultations, resulting in more efficient services (2-5 minutes), while family planning and health system clinics used synchronous video encounters requiring 10-30 minutes of clinician time. Family planning and health system primary care clinics mailed medications from clinic stock or internal pharmacies, while independent primary care practices and online services often used mail-order pharmacies. Online services offered patients asynchronous follow-up; other practice settings scheduled synchronous appointments. CONCLUSIONS: Rapid innovations implemented in response to disrupted in-person reproductive health care included remote medication abortion services with telehealth assessment/follow-up and mailed medications. Though consistent operational steps were identified across health care settings, variation allowed for adaptation of services to individual sites. Understanding remote abortion service operations may facilitate dissemination of a range of patient-centered reproductive health services.Annals "Online First" article.

Toxicity of abortifacients: A review for physicians in the post roe era.

BACKGROUND: On June 24, 2022, the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, which will limit legal abortion in many areas of the U.S. Over half of abortions in the U.S. are performed using medication as opposed to surgical techniques. With widespread access to agents that are used for medication abortion, there may be an increase in emergency department presentations related to improper or unsupervised use of these medications. METHODS: This narrative review focuses on the contraindications, adverse effects, and toxicities of the most common agents used for medication abortion in the U.S. RESULTS: Medications included in this review are mifepristone, misoprostol, and methotrexate. Each of these medications has a unique adverse effect and toxicity profile. CONCLUSION: Agents used for medication abortion have unique contraindications and adverse effects. Improper or unsupervised use may occur in the setting of limited abortion access and emergency medicine physicians are on the front lines in managing these presentations.

A cross-sectional study examining consideration of self-managed abortion among people seeking facility-based care in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: With increasing restrictions on abortion across the United States, we sought to understand whether people seeking abortion would consider ending their pregnancy on their own if unable to access a facility-based abortion. METHODS: From January to June 2019, we surveyed patients seeking abortion at 4 facilities in 3 US states. We explored consideration of self-managed abortion (SMA) using responses to the question: "Would you consider ending this pregnancy on your own if you are unable to obtain care at a health care facility?" We used multivariable Poisson regression to assess associations between individual sociodemographic, pregnancy and care-seeking characteristics and prevalence of considering SMA. In bivariate Poisson models, we also explored whether consideration of SMA differed by specific obstacles to abortion care. RESULTS: One-third (34%) of 741 participants indicated they would definitely or probably consider ending the pregnancy on their own if unable to obtain care at a facility. Consideration of SMA was higher among those who reported no health insurance (adjusted prevalence ratio [aPR] = 1.66; 95% Confidence Interval [CI] 1.12-2.44), described the pregnancy as unintended (aPR = 1.53; 95% CI 1.08-2.16), were seeking abortion due to concerns about their own physical or mental health (aPR = 1.50, 95% CI 1.02, 2.20), or experienced obstacles that delayed their abortion care seeking (aPR = 2.26, 95% CI 1.49, 3.40). Compared to those who would not consider SMA, participants who would consider SMA expressed higher difficulty finding an abortion facility (35 vs. 27%, p = 0.019), figuring out how to get to the clinic (29 vs 21%, p = 0.021) and needing multiple clinic visits (23 vs 17%, p = 0.044). CONCLUSIONS: One in three people seeking facility-based abortion would consider SMA if unable to obtain abortion care at a facility. As abortion access becomes increasingly restricted in the US, SMA may become more common. Future research should continue to monitor people's consideration and use of SMA and ensure that they have access to safe and effective methods.