Why prevention of repeat abortion is so challenging: psychosocial characteristics of women at risk

B. Leeners, Simone Bieli, D. Huang, S. Tschudin
{"title":"Why prevention of repeat abortion is so challenging: psychosocial characteristics of women at risk","authors":"B. Leeners, Simone Bieli, D. Huang, S. Tschudin","doi":"10.1080/13625187.2016.1258053","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Objectives: Abortion rates have declined in recent decades; however, the rate of repeat abortion remains high. In order to identify keys to making efficient interventions against repeat abortion, our objectives were: to assess the percentage of repeat abortions in women opting for termination of pregnancy over a period of 1 year; to identify the risk factors for repeat abortion; and to assess the characteristics of women who opted for a further pregnancy termination despite having received standard post-abortion care. Methods: A retrospective cross-sectional survey was carried out among 362 women who underwent pregnancy termination during a 1-year period. Women with and without repeat abortion were compared with regard to age, nationality, marital status, parity and use of contraception. In a subsample of 160 women who were available for follow-up over 4 years, those who underwent a further pregnancy termination during the observation period were also analysed qualitatively. Results: The rate of repeat abortion was 30.1% in the survey population. Age and immigrant status were identified as risk factors. The use of long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) was significantly higher after repeat abortion than after a first termination of pregnancy. Among women with repeat abortion in the follow-up group, those with psychological problems tended to discontinue contraception and those with partnership conflicts were prone to using unreliable contraceptive methods. Conclusion: Aside from promoting LARC methods, strategies to reduce repeat abortion should consider the psychosocial risk factors and characteristics of women at risk identified in this study. An interdisciplinary approach including social care and counselling would be the most appropriate means to enable this.","PeriodicalId":22423,"journal":{"name":"The European Journal of Contraception & Reproductive Health Care","volume":"19 1","pages":"38 - 44"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"17","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The European Journal of Contraception & Reproductive Health Care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13625187.2016.1258053","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 17

Abstract

Abstract Objectives: Abortion rates have declined in recent decades; however, the rate of repeat abortion remains high. In order to identify keys to making efficient interventions against repeat abortion, our objectives were: to assess the percentage of repeat abortions in women opting for termination of pregnancy over a period of 1 year; to identify the risk factors for repeat abortion; and to assess the characteristics of women who opted for a further pregnancy termination despite having received standard post-abortion care. Methods: A retrospective cross-sectional survey was carried out among 362 women who underwent pregnancy termination during a 1-year period. Women with and without repeat abortion were compared with regard to age, nationality, marital status, parity and use of contraception. In a subsample of 160 women who were available for follow-up over 4 years, those who underwent a further pregnancy termination during the observation period were also analysed qualitatively. Results: The rate of repeat abortion was 30.1% in the survey population. Age and immigrant status were identified as risk factors. The use of long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) was significantly higher after repeat abortion than after a first termination of pregnancy. Among women with repeat abortion in the follow-up group, those with psychological problems tended to discontinue contraception and those with partnership conflicts were prone to using unreliable contraceptive methods. Conclusion: Aside from promoting LARC methods, strategies to reduce repeat abortion should consider the psychosocial risk factors and characteristics of women at risk identified in this study. An interdisciplinary approach including social care and counselling would be the most appropriate means to enable this.
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
为什么预防重复流产如此具有挑战性:高危妇女的心理社会特征
摘要目的:近几十年来,堕胎率有所下降;然而,重复流产率仍然很高。为了确定对重复流产进行有效干预的关键,我们的目标是:评估1年内选择终止妊娠的妇女中重复流产的百分比;确定重复流产的危险因素;并评估那些尽管接受了标准的流产后护理但仍选择进一步终止妊娠的妇女的特征。方法:对362例1年内终止妊娠的妇女进行回顾性横断面调查。对有和没有重复堕胎的妇女进行年龄、国籍、婚姻状况、胎次和避孕措施使用情况的比较。在160名妇女的子样本中,随访超过4年,在观察期间再次终止妊娠的妇女也进行了定性分析。结果:调查人群中重复流产率为30.1%。年龄和移民身份被确定为危险因素。再次流产后使用长效可逆避孕(LARC)明显高于首次终止妊娠后。随访组重复流产妇女中,有心理问题的妇女倾向于停止避孕,有伴侣冲突的妇女倾向于使用不可靠的避孕方法。结论:除了推广LARC方法外,减少重复流产的策略应考虑本研究中确定的高危妇女的心理社会风险因素和特征。包括社会关怀和咨询在内的跨学科方法将是实现这一目标的最适当手段。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Pain relief during intrauterine device placement in nulligravid women with both oral ketorolac and an analgesic: a double-blinded randomised trial Legal abortion requests and outcomes for women when the law is restrictive – experience from a referral centre in south-eastern Brazil ‘Do I want children later in life?’ Reproductive intentions of 1700 adolescents Oestrogens in oral contraception: considerations for tailoring prescription to women’s needs Prevalence of high-risk HPV and cervical dysplasia in IUD users and controls: a cross sectional study
×
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