Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health最新文献

Context: Entertainment television can impact viewers' knowledge, attitudes, and reproductive health behaviors, yet little research has examined the impact of scripted abortion plotlines on viewers' abortion knowledge or social supportiveness for those having abortions. We examined the impact of an abortion storyline from Grey's Anatomy on US-based viewers.

Method: We conducted an online survey of likely Grey's Anatomy viewers prior to the episode's airing, assessing abortion ideology, knowledge, and support. After airing, we resurveyed respondents (including both those who had and had not viewed the target episode). We tested three hypotheses: episode exposure would (1) improve abortion knowledge and (2) increase support for medication abortion and decrease support for self-induced abortion, and (3) the effects on knowledge and supportive intention would be moderated by state support for abortion. We used independent samples t tests to examine hypotheses 1 and 2 and PROCESS macro to test the moderated effects (hypothesis 3).

Results: The results of the pretest/posttest analysis indicated that exposure to the episode significantly improved medication abortion knowledge. Increases in medication abortion knowledge were tied to explicit educational dialogue and did not translate into an increase in general abortion knowledge or social supportiveness. Notably, abortion-related state policy significantly moderated the influence of exposure for respondents in states with policies favorable to abortion access.

Conclusions: These findings suggest that entertainment television can contribute to meaningful increases in viewers' knowledge about abortion, but that the potential for impact of entertainment-education is closely linked to episode content and moderated by state-level abortion policy.

Context: Few qualitative findings have been published that explore and identify the challenges experienced by independent abortion providers during the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States (US). In this paper, we explore these themes while expanding the concept of "abortion exceptionalism" beyond its original legal meaning to address the impact of abortion stigma.

Methods: Twenty abortion providers from independent abortion clinics throughout the US South and Midwest participated in semi-structured interviews in June and July 2020. Interviews explored the challenges of providing abortion care in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic and sought to identify how clinics strategized and amended their clinical practices to continue providing abortion care during this time.

Results: All providers we spoke to noted significant challenges to providing abortion care in the early days of COVID-19. In addition to experiencing the same concerns as other health care institutions, abortion clinics also faced additional, unique burdens that can only be attributed to the politics of abortion exceptionalism. Examples of this abortion exceptionalism include abrupt orders to close clinics, the need to rely on traveling physicians, legislature-imposed limits on telemedicine, heightened activities of protesters, and non-evidence-based regulation of medication abortion.

Conclusion: Despite major challenges and differential treatment, independent abortion clinics in the US persevered to continue to provide abortion care throughout the COVID-19 pandemic.

Context: Little is known about whether adolescents' risk-taking in areas other than sex is associated with the effectiveness of their contraceptive method use, or whether any such associations vary by race and ethnicity.

Methods: Data from the 2011, 2013 and 2015 National Youth Risk Behavior Surveys were used to examine nonsexual risk behaviors and contraceptive method choice among 5,971 sexually active females aged 13-18. Risk-taking profiles for White, Black and Hispanic adolescents were identified using latent class analysis. Multinomial logistic regression was used to estimate the associations between these risk profiles and use of less- or more-effective contraceptive methods at last sexual intercourse.

Results: Three distinct risk-taking profiles were identified for White and Hispanic adolescents and two for Black adolescents. Compared with their counterparts in the low-risk "abstainer" group, White adolescents in the "high substance use and violence" group were less likely to use condoms alone (relative risk, 0.4) or a prescription contraceptive paired with condoms (0.3) rather than no contraceptive at all, and more likely to use withdrawal or no method rather than condoms alone (2.4 each). However, higher risk-taking among Whites was positively associated with using prescription contraceptives rather than condoms (1.9). Among Black and Hispanic females, lower risk-taking was associated only with more condom use.

Conclusions: Future studies should examine whether interventions designed to reduce adolescent risk-taking improve the effectiveness of contraceptive use, particularly among White females. However, efforts to increase Black and Hispanic adolescents' use of more-effective contraceptives should target barriers other than risk-proneness. Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 2020, 52(4):TK, doi:10.1363/psrh.12165.

Context: While community health centers (CHCs) are meeting increased demand for contraceptives, little is known about contraceptive counseling in these settings. Understanding how clinicians counsel about IUDs in CHCs, including whether they address or disregard young people's preferences and concerns during counseling, could improve contraceptive care.

Methods: As part of a training program, 20 clinicians from 11 San Francisco Bay Area CHC sites who counsel young people about contraception were interviewed by telephone in 2015 regarding their IUD counseling approaches. An iterative grounded theory approach was used to analyze interview transcripts and identify salient themes related to clinicians' contraceptive counseling, IUD removal practices and efforts to address patient concerns regarding side effects.

Results: Most clinicians offered comprehensive contraceptive counseling and method choice. While several clinicians viewed counseling as an opportunity to empower their patients to make contraceptive decisions without pressure, they also described a tension between guiding young people toward higher-efficacy methods and respecting patients' choices. Many clinicians engaged in what could be considered coercive practices by trying to dissuade patients from removals within a year of placement and offering to treat or downplay side effects.

Conclusions: Providers try to promote their young patients' autonomous decision making, but their support for high-efficacy methods can result in coercive practices. More training is needed to ensure that providers employ patient-centered counseling approaches, including honoring patient requests for removals.

Context: Although one in four U.S. women has an abortion in her lifetime, barriers to abortion persist, including distance to care. This study evaluates the association between distance to care and the abortion rate, adjusting for abortion demand.

Methods: Two analyses were conducted using a data set linking provider locations and 2000-2014 county-level abortion data for 18 states; data sources included the Census Bureau, state vital statistics offices and the Guttmacher Institute. First, a series of linear regression models were run, with and without adjustment for demographic covariates, modeling distance as both a continuous and a categorical variable. Then, an instrumental variable analysis was conducted in which being 30 or more miles from a large college-enrolled female population younger than age 25 was used as an instrument for distance to a provider. The outcome variable for all models was abortions per 1,000 women aged 25 or older. All models were adjusted for state, year and state-year interaction fixed effects.

Results: Increased distance to a provider was associated with a decreased abortion rate. Each additional mile to a provider was associated with a decrease of 0.011 in the abortion rate. Compared with being within 30 miles of a provider, being between 30 and 90 miles from a provider was associated with 0.80-1.46 fewer abortions per 1,000 women. In the instrumental variable analysis, being 30 or more miles from a provider was associated with 5.26 fewer abortions per 1,000 women.

Conclusions: Distance to a provider may present a barrier to abortion by preventing access to care. Therefore, policies that increase travel distances have potential for harm.

Context: The ways in which the COVID-19 pandemic has affected abortion providers and abortion care, and the strategies clinics are adopting to navigate the pandemic, have not been well documented.

Methods: In April-May 2020, representatives from 103 independent abortion clinics (i.e., those not affiliated with Planned Parenthood) completed a survey that included close-ended questions about how the pandemic, the public health response, and designations of abortion as a nonessential service had affected their clinic, as well as open-ended questions about the pandemic's impact. Analyses were primarily descriptive but included an exploration of regional variation.

Results: All U.S. regions were represented in the sample. At 51% of clinics, clinicians or staff had been unable to work because of the pandemic or public health responses. Temporary closures were more common among clinics in the South (35%) and Midwest (21%) than in the Northeast and West (5% each). More than half of clinics had canceled or postponed nonabortion services (e.g., general gynecologic care); cancelation or postponement of abortion services was less common (25-38%, depending on type) and again especially prevalent in the South and Midwest. Respondents reported the pandemic had had numerous effects on their clinics, including disrupting their workforce, clinic flow and work practices; increasing expenses; and reducing revenues. State laws (including designations of abortion as nonessential) had exacerbated these difficulties.

Conclusions: Although independent abortion clinics have faced considerable challenges from the pandemic, most continued to provide abortion care. Despite this resiliency, additional support may be needed to ensure sustainability of these clinics.