Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health最新文献

Context: A growing body of evidence supports over-the-counter access to oral contraceptives in the United States. An important consideration for over-the-counter approval is consumers' ability to understand key package label messages related to safety and effectiveness without clinician involvement. We developed a prototype over-the-counter Drug Facts Label for a combined oral contraceptive pill and conducted a pilot label comprehension study to evaluate consumer understanding of key messages for use.

Methods: In November-December 2020, we conducted interviews with 163 adults and teens in the United States who were aged 12-49 years and identified as female or another gender but had a uterus and the ability to become pregnant. We developed 11 primary endpoints based on assessment of clinical risks that could occur if consumers fail to heed them, including messages about contraindications and directions for use; 11 secondary endpoints represented additional important information but with lower potential for clinical consequences if not understood. We evaluated endpoint comprehension by computing frequencies, percentages, and 2-sided Exact (Clopper-Pearson) 95% confidence intervals for observed proportions.

Results: Ten of the 11 primary endpoints and 10 of the 11 secondary endpoints were each understood by ≥95% of participants. The remaining primary endpoint on use with prior blood clots was understood by 89% of participants. The remaining secondary endpoint on the product being designed for "people who have the ability to become pregnant" was understood by 83% of participants.

Conclusion: Participants understood the key label information required for safe and effective combined oral contraceptive use without clinician involvement.

Background: The number of women using long-acting reversible contraception (LARC)-intrauterine devices (IUDs) and implants-is increasing and 14% of contraceptive users in the United States adopt LARC. We examined correlates of LARC never-use in a population-based survey of reproductive-aged women in Ohio.

Methods: We analyzed data from the 2018-19 Ohio Survey of Women. We examined the prevalence of LARC never-use and reasons for never-use among ever users of contraception (N = 2388). Using Poisson regression to generate prevalence ratios (PRs), we examined associations between selected correlates (demographic factors, healthcare access/quality measures, and religious/political views) and LARC never-use.

Results: Most Ohio women (74%) had never used LARC. Commonly reported reasons for not using an IUD or an implant were preferring a different method (46% and 45%, respectively), not wanting an object inside their body (45% and 43%), side effect concerns (39% and 33%), insertion/removal concerns (31% and 25%), and unfamiliarity (13% and 20%). Conservative political views (PR: 1.12, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.04-1.22), pro-life affiliation (PR: 1.11, 95% CI: 1.02-1.20), placing high importance on religion in daily life (PR: 1.15, 95% CI: 1.06-1.26), and being non-Hispanic white as compared to non-Hispanic Black (PR: 1.20, 95% CI: 1.02-1.41) were significantly associated with LARC never-use. Findings were generally similar for models analyzing IUD and implant never-use separately.

Conclusions: Among ever-users of contraception, LARC never-use was associated with having conservative political views, being religious, and having a pro-life affiliation. Except for race/ethnicity, demographic and healthcare measures were not associated with LARC never-use among women in Ohio.

Background: Sexual and reproductive health services promote the ability of people to have safe, satisfying, non-coercive sexual experiences and make informed decisions about pregnancy. Stakeholder input is needed to understand barriers or facilitators to service access for autistic people, who report unmet needs.

Methods: We recruited 18 autistic people, 15 parents, and 15 service providers in the United States to participate in an interview and two surveys. Using their input, we created a conceptual model of sexual and reproductive health service needs, access barriers, and facilitators.

Results: Stakeholders rated a variety of sexual and reproductive health services as important for autistic people, including those with intellectual disability or minimal verbal language. Stakeholders identified barriers to sexual and reproductive health service utilization including lack of service availability, lack of service providers with autism or neurodiversity training, lack of accurate information about autism and sexuality, verbal and communication differences that are not accommodated by service providers, and socio-cultural attitudes about sexuality. Stakeholders identified facilitators to service access including person-centered, trauma-informed care, service accommodations such as clear and detailed expectations, and long-enough appointments. We created a conceptual model based on the social ecological model of health to organize these utilization factors and support future research, provider, and policy action. Stakeholders provided feedback and responded favorably on the model's accuracy, utility for spurring research, practice, and policy improvements, and application to diverse groups of autistic people.

Conclusions: The model shows the many feasible ways to support equitable access to services for autistic people.

Objectives: This exploratory study aimed to assess COVID-19-related changes in abortion service availability and use in Washington, DC, Maryland, and Virginia.

Design: Data came from a convenience sample of eight abortion clinics in this region. We implemented a cross-sectional survey and collected retrospective aggregate monthly abortion data overall and by facility type, abortion type, and patient characteristics for March 2019-August 2020. We evaluated changes in the distribution of the total number of patients for March-August in 2019 compared to March-August 2020. We also conducted segmented regression analyses and produced scatter plots of monthly abortion patients overall and by facility type, abortion type, and patient characteristics, with separate fitted regression lines from the segmented regression models for the pre- and during-COVID-19 periods.

Results: Five clinics reported a reduced number of appointments early in the pandemic while four reported increased call volume. There were declines in the monthly abortion trend at hospital-based clinics at the outset of the pandemic. Monthly number of medication abortions increased from March 2020 through August 2020 compared to pre-COVID-19 trends while instrumentation abortions 11 up to 19 weeks decreased. The share of abortions to Black individuals increased during the early phase of the pandemic, as did the monthly trend in abortions among this group. We also saw changes in payment type, with declines in patients paying out-of-pocket.

Conclusions: Results revealed differences in abortion services, numbers, and types during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic in Washington, DC, Maryland, and Virginia.

Objective: To examine factors associated with physicians' level of concern and perceived consequences of publicly supporting abortion at Wisconsin's largest and only publicly funded medical school.

Methods: We surveyed physicians at the University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health about their knowledge, attitudes, and referral practices regarding abortion care. Among those who expressed support for abortion (N = 701), we analyzed perceived concerns about making their support public.

Results: Nearly a quarter (22%) of respondents felt very or extremely concerned that taking a strong public stance on abortion would alienate patients and 17% felt very or extremely concerned that doing so would alienate coworkers. More than a quarter (27%) felt very or extremely concerned that publicly supporting abortion would lead to harassment or harm. Those with greater concerns about expressing public support for abortion were comparatively less willing to refer for or participate in abortion care themselves.

Conclusions: Many physicians supportive of abortion reported concerns over publicizing their support for this common health care service. These concerns may render physicians less likely to refer patients for needed abortion care or weigh in on abortion policy.

Objectives: To evaluate self-reported outcomes and serious adverse events following self-managed medication abortion using misoprostol alone provided from an online service.

Study design: We conducted a retrospective record review of self-managed abortion outcomes using misoprostol obtained from Aid Access, an online telemedicine organization serving United States (US) residents, between June 1, 2020, and June 30, 2020. The main outcomes were the proportion of people who reported ending their pregnancy without instrumentation intervention and the proportion who received treatment for serious adverse events.

Results: During the study period, 1016 people received prescriptions for misoprostol. We obtained follow-up information for 610 (60%) of whom 568 confirmed use of the medication and 42 confirmed non-use. When taking the medication, 96% were at or less than 10 weeks' gestation and 4% were more than 10 weeks. Overall, 88% (95% CI: 84.6-90.2) reported successfully ending their pregnancy without instrumentation intervention. Of the 568 who took the misoprostol, 12 (2%) reported experiencing one or more serious adverse events and 20 (4%) reported experiencing a symptom of a potential complication.

Conclusions: Self-managed medication abortion using misoprostol provided by an online telemedicine service has a high rate of effectiveness and a low rate of serious adverse events. Outcomes compare favorably to other service delivery models using a similar regimen. As mifepristone continues to be over-regulated and the 2022 US Supreme Court ruling allows states to severely restrict access to in-clinic abortion care, this regimen is a promising option for self-managed abortion in the US.

Objectives: Much of reproductive health care policy in the United States focuses on enabling women to have intended pregnancies. Investigating whether the association between pregnancy intention and adverse outcomes for mothers and children in the immediate and longer term is due to intention or a mother's demographics provides valuable context for policy makers aiming to improve maternal and child outcomes.

Methods: We investigated relationships between pregnancy intention and pregnancy, infant, early childhood, and maternal outcomes using data from the Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System survey, conducted 2-8 months after the child's birth, and follow-up surveys from three states (Alaska, Missouri, and Oklahoma), administered at age 2-3 years old. We used logistic regressions with inverse propensity weights to measure associations, accounting for potential confounding factors.

Results: After inverse propensity weighting, pregnancy intention was associated with adverse maternal pregnancy behaviors but not most infant outcomes. Mothers who reported an unwanted pregnancy were associated with increased odds of the child receiving a developmental delay diagnosis. Among those who did not report depression prior to pregnancy, mothers with unwanted pregnancies were more likely to experience persistent depression, and mothers with pregnancies mistimed by two or more years had a higher likelihood of experiencing depression postpartum or in the follow up period.

Conclusions: Our findings suggest that pregnancy intention is less consequential for maternal and child well-being than socio-economic disadvantage, suggesting that re-orienting policy toward social conditions and reproductive autonomy will serve better individual and population health.

Background: This study provides a baseline assessment of abortion incidence and service delivery prior to Roe v. Wade being overturned.

Methods: We collected information from all facilities known to have provided abortion services in the United States in 2019 and 2020. We examined abortion incidence by state, region and nationally and combined data on number of abortions with population data to estimate abortion rates. We also examined the number of abortion clinics, trends in medication abortion and service disruptions and changes in abortion protocols that occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic. We compare these findings to those of our prior Abortion Provider Census, which collected information for 2017.

Results: We documented 930,160 abortions in 2020, an 8% increase from 2017. Between 2017 and 2020, abortion incidence increased in all four regions of the country and in a majority of states. The total number of clinics providing abortion care remained stable nationally but increased in the Midwest and the West and declined in the Northeast and South. There were 492,210 medication abortions in 2020, a 45% increase from 2017. A substantial minority of clinics adjusted protocols in response to COVID, most commonly adopting remote pre- and post-abortion counseling.

Discussion: This study did not address factors behind the increase in abortion. However, this report demonstrates that the need for abortion care was growing just prior to the overturning Roe v. Wade, and the impact of this decision will be even more far-reaching than previously expected.

Context: When an individual seeking an abortion cannot obtain one, carrying that pregnancy to term may affect both her relationship with the man involved in the pregnancy and her prospects for new intimate relationships. We aimed to assess the impact of receiving versus being denied a wanted abortion on women's intimate relationships, up to 5 years after seeking an abortion in the United States.

Methods: Using mixed-effects regression models, we compared relationship outcomes among women who presented for abortion care just under facilities' gestational age limits ("Near-limit abortion patients," n = 452) with those who presented just over, were denied an abortion ("Turnaways," n = 146) at 30 US facilities.

Results: At 1 week post-abortion seeking, the predicted probability of being in a relationship with the man involved in the pregnancy was 58%, gradually declining to 27% at 5 years with no significant differences between those who received and those who were denied an abortion. However, from 2 to 5 years post-abortion seeking, participants who were denied an abortion had double the odds (aOR = 2.01, 95% CI: 1.09-3.69) of being in a poor intimate relationship, with a predicted probability of being in a poor relationship of 14% among those denied an abortion compared with 9% among those who received one (p < 0.05).

Conclusions: Carrying an unwanted pregnancy to term does not increase the chance of being in an intimate relationship with the man involved in the pregnancy but may have negative implications for the quality of future relationships up to 5 years post-abortion seeking.

Context: Abortions are substantially underreported in surveys due to social stigma, compromising the study of abortion, pregnancy, fertility, and related demographic and health outcomes.

Methods: In this study, we evaluated six methodological approaches identified through formative mixed-methods research to improve the measurement of abortion in surveys. These approaches included altering the placement of abortion items in the survey, the order of pregnancy outcome questions, the level of detail, the introduction to the abortion question, and the context of the abortion question, and using graduated sensitivity. We embedded a preregistered randomized experiment in a newly designed online survey about sexual and reproductive health behaviors (N = 6536). We randomized respondents to experimental arms in a fully crossed factorial design; we estimated an average treatment effect using standardized estimators from logistic regression models, adjusted for demographic covariates associated with reporting.

Results: None of the experimental arms significantly improved abortion reporting compared to the control condition.

Conclusion: More work is needed to improve reporting of abortion in future surveys, particularly as abortion access becomes increasingly restricted in the United States. Despite this study's null results, it provides a promising path for future efforts to improve abortion measurement. It is proof of concept for testing new approaches in a less expensive, faster, and more flexible format than embedding changes in existing national fertility surveys.