BMJ Sexual & Reproductive Health最新文献

Background: In many countries, persons seeking medical abortion with mifepristone followed by misoprostol can self-administer the second drug, misoprostol, at home, but self-administration of the first drug, mifepristone, is not allowed to the same extent.

Objectives: This systematic review aims to evaluate whether the efficacy, safety and women's satisfaction with abortion treatment are affected when mifepristone is self-administered at home instead of in a clinic.

Search strategy: A literature search covered CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Embase, Ovid MEDLINE and APA PsycInfo in October 2022.

Selection criteria: Eligible studies focused on persons undergoing medical abortion comparing home and in-clinic mifepristone intake. Outcomes included abortion effectiveness, compliance, acceptability, and practical consequences for women.

Data collection and analysis: Two reviewers independently assessed eligibility and risk of bias. Meta-analysis included similar studies while those differing in design were synthesised without meta-analysis.

Results: Six studies (54 233 women) of medical abortions up to 10 weeks were included. One randomised controlled trial and one retrospective register study had moderate risk of bias, and four non-randomised clinical trials where women could choose the place for intake of mifepristone had serious risk of bias. There was no difference in abortion effectiveness (high confidence) or compliance (moderate confidence) between mifepristone administered at home or in-clinic. No differences in complications were detected between groups and most women who chose home administration of mifepristone expressed a preference for this approach.

Conclusions: Our systematic review demonstrates that the effectiveness of medical abortion is comparable regardless of mifepristone administration and intake, at home or in the clinic.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic response prompted rapid changes to how contraceptive services were delivered in England. Our aim was to examine women's experiences of accessing contraceptive services since March 2020 and to understand any inequalities of access.

Methods: We conducted telephone interviews with 31 women aged 17-54 years who had accessed contraceptive services in England since March 2020. The sample was skewed to include participants with lower educational attainment and higher deprivation. Interview transcripts were thematically analysed using inductive and deductive approaches.

Results: Few differences were found regarding educational attainment. Participants using contraceptive injections (all living in areas in the most deprived quintile) reported the greatest access challenges. Some switched method or stopped using contraception as a result. More general barriers reported by participants included service closures, unclear booking processes, and lack of appointment availability. Many participants welcomed the flexibility and convenience of remote contraceptive services. However, telephone appointments posed challenges for those at school or living with parents, and some described them as rushed and inconducive to asking questions or raising concerns. Those accessing contraception for the first time or nearing menopause felt they were unable to access sufficient support and guidance during the pandemic. Some participants voiced concerns around the lasting effects of COVID-19 on appointment availability and inadequate service delivery.

Conclusions: Women's experiences of accessing contraceptive services in England since March 2020 are diverse. While remote services were suitable for some, COVID-19 restrictions unequally impacted women depending on their method of contraception and life stage.

Background: Unintended pregnancy (UIP) and substance use disorder share underlying root causes with similar impacts for women and their offspring in pregnancy, birth and beyond. Furthermore, intoxication with alcohol and other drugs (AOD) increases the risk of UIP.

Objectives: To assess the available evidence on associations between UIP and health, social and economic outcomes, in women who use AOD.

Search strategy: The review utilised the Joanna Briggs Institute Methodology for Scoping Reviews and PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) reporting guidelines. The search was conducted across multiple databases, including Scopus and Medline, and limited to studies published between January 2000 to June 2023.

Selection criteria: Studies reporting on interactions between AOD use and UIP, and pregnancy, birth, infant, childhood, social or economic outcomes. All patterns and types of AOD use, except isolated use of tobacco, were included. Studies were available in English and conducted in high-income countries.

Data collection and analysis: Selected articles were reviewed, and data collected by two independent reviewers using a standardised data extraction sheet. Findings were summarised and reported descriptively.

Main results: A total of 2536 titles and abstracts were screened, 97 full texts were reviewed, and three studies were selected for inclusion in the scoping review. There was heterogeneity in types and patterns of AOD use, differences in study design and tools to assess pregnancy intention, and each focused on disparate outcomes. No study assessed or reported on birth outcomes.

Conclusion: There is a paucity of data examining the intersection between AOD use and UIP and further research is needed.

Background: Little is known about the degree to which the COVID-19 pandemic, and associated restrictions and disruptions to health services, impacted the accessibility of hormonal long-acting reversible contraception (LARC) devices within Australia. Here, we explore longitudinal patterns of dispensing of the contraceptive implant and hormonal intrauterine devices (IUDs) within Australia, before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Methods: Population-based cohort study; analysis of 10% random sample of national Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme dispensing data, for females aged 15-49 years dispensed a hormonal LARC device between February 2017 and November 2021.

Results: Interrupted time-series analysis demonstrated overall that there were no significant differences in monthly dispensing rates of hormonal LARC following the Australian onset of the pandemic in April 2020, with no subsequent change in the trend. However, when stratified by LARC type, a significant increase was evident during the pandemic period (April 2020-November 2021) in the rate of hormonal IUD dispensing per month (0.20 per 10 000 95% CI 0.01 to 0.38)), compared with a decrease for the implant (-0.08 per 10 000 (95% CI -0.16 to 0.01)). Increases in hormonal IUD dispensing during the pandemic were most pronounced for those aged 20-24 years, new users, those without a Commonwealth concession card, and in the State of Victoria.

Conclusions: Within Australia in the defined pandemic period, access to hormonal LARC devices was not negatively impacted. Rather a significant increase in dispensing of hormonal IUDs was evident.

Objectives: The primary objective of this study was to assess the feasibility of initiating medical abortions in a large, academic emergency department (ED) in the United States.

Methods: A retrospective case series analysis was conducted to evaluate a protocol for initiating medical abortion in the ED implemented from January 2020 to October 2023 at an academic, tertiary care hospital in California, USA. Participants included ED patients diagnosed with pregnancies in the first trimester that were undesired and who opted for medical abortion. The medical abortion protocol was collaboratively designed by a multidisciplinary team and follow-up was conducted by our institution's gynaecology department. Data were sourced from a data repository of electronic health records and subjected to descriptive statistical analysis.

Results: A total of 27 eligible patients initiated medical abortions in the ED during the study period. The cohort was diverse in terms of racial and ethnic backgrounds and almost evenly split between private and public insurance. No patients had significant complications identified in the medical record. Two patients required uterine aspiration by the gynaecology team; one patient in clinic and one during a return visit to the ED.

Conclusions: Data from this case series suggest that initiating medical abortion in the ED is feasible. The ED may be considered as an additional access point for abortion care services, especially in areas where other care options are not readily available. Educational, legal and regulatory frameworks that allow emergency physicians to take a greater role in providing this care should be considered.