Test or No-Test: Comparison of Medication Abortion Outcomes and Adverse Events When Forgoing Ultrasound, Laboratory Testing, and Physical Examination

IF 2 Q2 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology Canada Pub Date : 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1016/j.jogc.2024.102730
Caitlin Hunter MD, CCFP , Maya Burck BA , Colleen Chambers MSc , Farhana Shawon MD , M. Ruth Lavergne PhD , Amanda Whitten MA, MD, CCFP , Mei-ling Wiedmeyer MD, CCFP, MSc
{"title":"Test or No-Test: Comparison of Medication Abortion Outcomes and Adverse Events When Forgoing Ultrasound, Laboratory Testing, and Physical Examination","authors":"Caitlin Hunter MD, CCFP ,&nbsp;Maya Burck BA ,&nbsp;Colleen Chambers MSc ,&nbsp;Farhana Shawon MD ,&nbsp;M. Ruth Lavergne PhD ,&nbsp;Amanda Whitten MA, MD, CCFP ,&nbsp;Mei-ling Wiedmeyer MD, CCFP, MSc","doi":"10.1016/j.jogc.2024.102730","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>This study aimed to compare demographics and clinical outcomes between patients who did not undergo investigations and those who underwent investigations before receiving a prescription for medication abortion (MA) during the first 6 months of the COVID-19 pandemic. Outcomes include success rates, adverse events, pathways to completion, and loss to follow-up rates.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We conducted a retrospective medical record review of 1452 patients presenting for MA between 23 March 2020 and 30 September 2020. Descriptive statistics, 2 × 2 chi-square tests, and Fisher exact tests were used to compare characteristics and outcomes between groups.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Of the 1307 patients who received a prescription, 895 (68.5%) were in the no-test group and 412 (31.5%) were in the test group. The success rate was 95.2%, with no significant difference between groups (94.0% and 95.8%, <em>P</em> = 0.194). Rates of adverse events were low, with 28 patients presenting for emergency department visits (2.1%), 62 having clinically significant retained products of conception (4.7%), 5 with heavy bleeding requiring treatment (0.4%), 16 with ongoing pregnancy (1.2%), and 3 requiring ectopic pregnancy management (0.2%). Completion of abortion was verified in 1034 patients (80.5%), and the loss to follow-up rate was 22.6%, with no difference between the groups (82.1% vs. 79.8%, <em>P</em> = 0.341; and 21.4% vs. 23.1%, <em>P</em> = 0.477; respectively).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>We found that clinical outcomes were consistent across the 2 groups, with high success rates and low adverse event rates. Our study contributes to the growing body of evidence that allows for individualized care implementing selective use of low- and no-test MA protocols.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":16688,"journal":{"name":"Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology Canada","volume":"47 1","pages":"Article 102730"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology Canada","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S170121632400553X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives

This study aimed to compare demographics and clinical outcomes between patients who did not undergo investigations and those who underwent investigations before receiving a prescription for medication abortion (MA) during the first 6 months of the COVID-19 pandemic. Outcomes include success rates, adverse events, pathways to completion, and loss to follow-up rates.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective medical record review of 1452 patients presenting for MA between 23 March 2020 and 30 September 2020. Descriptive statistics, 2 × 2 chi-square tests, and Fisher exact tests were used to compare characteristics and outcomes between groups.

Results

Of the 1307 patients who received a prescription, 895 (68.5%) were in the no-test group and 412 (31.5%) were in the test group. The success rate was 95.2%, with no significant difference between groups (94.0% and 95.8%, P = 0.194). Rates of adverse events were low, with 28 patients presenting for emergency department visits (2.1%), 62 having clinically significant retained products of conception (4.7%), 5 with heavy bleeding requiring treatment (0.4%), 16 with ongoing pregnancy (1.2%), and 3 requiring ectopic pregnancy management (0.2%). Completion of abortion was verified in 1034 patients (80.5%), and the loss to follow-up rate was 22.6%, with no difference between the groups (82.1% vs. 79.8%, P = 0.341; and 21.4% vs. 23.1%, P = 0.477; respectively).

Conclusions

We found that clinical outcomes were consistent across the 2 groups, with high success rates and low adverse event rates. Our study contributes to the growing body of evidence that allows for individualized care implementing selective use of low- and no-test MA protocols.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
检查或不检查:放弃超声、实验室检查和体格检查时药物流产结局和不良事件的比较。
目的:比较COVID-19大流行前6个月未接受调查的患者与接受药物流产(MA)处方前接受调查的患者的人口统计学和临床结果。结果包括成功率、不良事件、完成途径和失访率。方法:我们对2020年3月23日至2020年9月30日期间出现MA的1452例患者进行了回顾性图表回顾。描述性统计、2×2卡方检验和Fisher精确检验用于组间特征和结果的比较。结果:1307例处方患者中,未试验组895例(68.5%),试验组412例(31.5%)。成功率为95.2%,两组间差异无统计学意义(94.0%,95.8%,P = 0.194)。不良事件发生率较低,有28例患者就诊于急诊室(2.1%),62例有临床意义的妊娠残留(4.7%),5例需要治疗的大出血(0.4%),16例正在妊娠(1.2%),3例需要异位处理(0.2%)。流产完成1034例(80.5%),失访率为22.6%,两组间差异无统计学意义(82.1%∶79.8%,P = 0.341; 21.4%∶23.1%,P = 0.477)。结论:我们发现两组临床结果一致,成功率高,不良事件发生率低。我们的研究为个性化护理提供了越来越多的证据,这些证据可以选择性地使用低测试和无测试的MA协议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
5.60%
发文量
302
审稿时长
32 days
期刊介绍: Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Canada (JOGC) is Canada"s peer-reviewed journal of obstetrics, gynaecology, and women"s health. Each monthly issue contains original research articles, reviews, case reports, commentaries, and editorials on all aspects of reproductive health. JOGC is the original publication source of evidence-based clinical guidelines, committee opinions, and policy statements that derive from standing or ad hoc committees of the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada. JOGC is included in the National Library of Medicine"s MEDLINE database, and abstracts from JOGC are accessible on PubMed.
期刊最新文献
The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Prenatal Screening Modality for Singleton Pregnancies in Ontario Table of Contents Anemia Near Delivery Is Prevalent, Pernicious, and Associated With Lower Neighbourhood Income: An Analysis of Over 50 000 Pregnancies First-Trimester PlGF and PAPP-A and the Risk of Placenta-Mediated Complications: PREDICTION Prospective Study Prediction Model for Cesarean Scar Disorder Disappearance After Transvaginal Uterine Diverticulum Repair
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1