Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health最新文献

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: 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.

Context: The important role of Title X sites in supporting publicly funded reproductive healthcare was elevated during the COVID-19 pandemic, as many people experienced economic uncertainty and changed their fertility preferences. In this study, we assessed changes in service delivery during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic at Title X-supported sites in Texas, a large state with a high uninsured rate and a diverse Title X network.

Methods: Using surveys of Title X-funded organizations in Texas from April and November 2020, we examined the percentage of organizations reporting service modifications. With administrative data on 507,947 client encounters between March 2019 and March 2021, we assessed change in client volume at the onset of the pandemic and evaluated the association between regional COVID-19 case rates and the provision of key Title X services.

Results: In April 2020, most organizations (78%) limited in-person operations while implementing telehealth (74%) and contactless contraception (67%). Network-wide encounter volume declined by 26% at pandemic onset (incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 0.74, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.65, 0.84). Health departments experienced the steepest declines in encounter volume (IRR = 0.43, 95% CI = 0.36-0.50). Weekly encounters, particularly for long-acting reversible method placement/removal and sexually transmitted infection testing, decreased as COVID-19 rates increased.

Conclusions: Investment in public health infrastructure, including providing robust support to health departments as well as rebuilding and expanding the Title X network, is essential to safeguarding access to publicly funded reproductive healthcare during and after the pandemic.

Context: Direct-to-patient telemedicine abortion allows people to receive mifepristone and misoprostol for medication abortion in their home without requiring an in-person visit with a healthcare provider. This method has high efficacy and safety, but less is known about the person-centered quality of care provided with telemedicine.

Methods: We interviewed 45 participants from the TelAbortion study of direct-to-patient telemedicine abortion in the United States from January to July 2020. Semi-structured qualitative interviews queried their choices, barriers to care, expectations for care, actual abortion experience, and suggestions for improvement. We developed a codebook through an iterative, inductive process and performed content and thematic analyses.

Results: The experience of direct-to-patient telemedicine abortion met the person-centered domains of dignity, autonomy, privacy, communication, social support, supportive care, trust, and environment. Four themes relate to the person-centered framework for reproductive health equity: (1) Participants felt well-supported and safe with TelAbortion; (2) Participants had autonomy in their care which led to feelings of empowerment; (3) TelAbortion exceeded expectations; and (4) Challenges arose when interfacing with the healthcare system outside of TelAbortion. Participants perceived abortion stigma which often led them to avoid traditional care and experienced enacted stigma during encounters with non-study healthcare workers.

Conclusion: TelAbortion is a high quality, person-centered care model that can empower patients seeking care in an increasingly challenging abortion context.

Context: The COVID-19 pandemic abruptly disrupted the provision of sexual and reproductive health care in the United States.

Methods: We conducted interviews with family planning clinic staff at 55 health care facilities in Arizona, Iowa, and Wisconsin in late 2020 and early 2021. We asked respondents about the challenges they faced and ways they adapted their service provision as a result of the pandemic. We conducted content and thematic analyses of the interview transcripts using an inductively developed qualitative coding scheme.

Results: Family planning clinics and providers made a variety of changes to their clinic operations and service delivery. The three major areas of change for these facilities were implementation of COVID-19 safety procedures, shifting service delivery and staffing to meet patient needs, and the rapid uptake and expansion of telehealth.

Conclusion: While providers faced many challenges, they also described opportunities to innovate and rethink standard of care protocols that may continue to shape sexual and reproductive health care even after the pandemic abates.

Introduction: Although debate remains about the saliency and relevance of pro-choice and pro-life labels (as abortion belief indicators), they have been consistently used for decades to broadly designate abortion identity. However, clear labels are less apparent in other languages (e.g., Spanish). Social media, as an exploratory data science tool, can be leveraged to identify the presence and popularity of online abortion identity labels and how they are contextualized online.

Purpose: This study aims to determine how popularly used Spanish-language pro-choice and pro-life identity labels are contextualized online.

Method: We used Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) topic models, an unsupervised natural language processing (NLP) application, to generate themes about Spanish language tweets categorized by Spanish abortion identity labels: (1) proelección (pro-choice); (2) derecho a decidir (right to choose); (3) proaborto (pro-abortion); (4) provida (pro-life); (5) antiaborto (anti-abortion); and (6) derecho a vivir (right to life). We manually reviewed themes for each identity label to assess scope.

Results: All six identity labels included in our analysis contained some references to abortion. However, several labels were not exclusive to abortion. Proelección (pro-choice), for example, contained several themes related to ongoing presidential elections.

Discussion and conclusion: No singular Spanish abortion identity label encapsulates abortion beliefs; however, there are several viable options. Just as the debate remains ongoing about pro-choice and pro-life as accurate indicators of abortion beliefs in English, we must also consider that identity is more complex than binary labels in Spanish.

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.