米非司酮用于早期妊娠损失:美国马萨诸塞州妇产科医师障碍和促进因素的定性研究。

IF 3.4 2区 医学 Q1 DEMOGRAPHY Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health Pub Date : 2023-09-01 Epub Date: 2023-07-02 DOI:10.1363/psrh.12237
Sara Neill, Mugdha Mokashi, Alisa Goldberg, Jennifer Fortin, Elizabeth Janiak
{"title":"米非司酮用于早期妊娠损失:美国马萨诸塞州妇产科医师障碍和促进因素的定性研究。","authors":"Sara Neill,&nbsp;Mugdha Mokashi,&nbsp;Alisa Goldberg,&nbsp;Jennifer Fortin,&nbsp;Elizabeth Janiak","doi":"10.1363/psrh.12237","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Context: </strong>Early pregnancy loss (EPL) affects 1 million patients in the United States (US) annually, but integration of mifepristone into EPL care may be complicated by regulatory barriers, practice-related factors, and abortion stigma.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted qualitative, semi-structured interviews among obstetrician-gynecologists in independent practice in Massachusetts, US on mifepristone use for EPL. We recruited participants via professional networks and purposively sampled for mifepristone use, practice type, time in practice, and geographic location within Massachusetts until we reached thematic saturation. We analyzed interviews using inductive and deductive coding under a thematic analysis framework to identify facilitators of and barriers to mifepristone use.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We interviewed 19 obstetrician-gynecologists; 12 had used mifepristone for EPL and 7 had not. Participants were in private practice (n = 12), academic practice (n = 6), or worked at a federally qualified health center (n = 1). Seven had fellowship training, including four in complex family planning. The most common facilitators of mifepristone use for EPL were access to the expertise or protocols of local-regional experts, leadership from a \"champion,\" prior experience with abortion care, and hospital capacity constraints during the COVID-19 pandemic. The most common barriers were related to the Mifepristone Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) Program imposed by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Additionally, mifepristone's affiliation with abortion was a barrier to its use in EPL for some obstetrician-gynecologists.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The FDA Mifepristone REMS Program presents substantial barriers to obstetrician-gynecologists incorporating mifepristone into their EPL care.</p>","PeriodicalId":47632,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health","volume":"55 3","pages":"210-217"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Mifepristone use for early pregnancy loss: A qualitative study of barriers and facilitators among OB/GYNS in Massachusetts, USA.\",\"authors\":\"Sara Neill,&nbsp;Mugdha Mokashi,&nbsp;Alisa Goldberg,&nbsp;Jennifer Fortin,&nbsp;Elizabeth Janiak\",\"doi\":\"10.1363/psrh.12237\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Context: </strong>Early pregnancy loss (EPL) affects 1 million patients in the United States (US) annually, but integration of mifepristone into EPL care may be complicated by regulatory barriers, practice-related factors, and abortion stigma.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted qualitative, semi-structured interviews among obstetrician-gynecologists in independent practice in Massachusetts, US on mifepristone use for EPL. We recruited participants via professional networks and purposively sampled for mifepristone use, practice type, time in practice, and geographic location within Massachusetts until we reached thematic saturation. We analyzed interviews using inductive and deductive coding under a thematic analysis framework to identify facilitators of and barriers to mifepristone use.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We interviewed 19 obstetrician-gynecologists; 12 had used mifepristone for EPL and 7 had not. Participants were in private practice (n = 12), academic practice (n = 6), or worked at a federally qualified health center (n = 1). Seven had fellowship training, including four in complex family planning. The most common facilitators of mifepristone use for EPL were access to the expertise or protocols of local-regional experts, leadership from a \\\"champion,\\\" prior experience with abortion care, and hospital capacity constraints during the COVID-19 pandemic. The most common barriers were related to the Mifepristone Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) Program imposed by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Additionally, mifepristone's affiliation with abortion was a barrier to its use in EPL for some obstetrician-gynecologists.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The FDA Mifepristone REMS Program presents substantial barriers to obstetrician-gynecologists incorporating mifepristone into their EPL care.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47632,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health\",\"volume\":\"55 3\",\"pages\":\"210-217\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1363/psrh.12237\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/7/2 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"DEMOGRAPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1363/psrh.12237","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/7/2 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DEMOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:在美国,每年有100万名患者患有早期妊娠损失(EPL),但米非司酮与EPL护理的结合可能会因监管障碍、实践相关因素和堕胎耻辱而变得复杂。方法:我们对美国马萨诸塞州独立执业的妇产科医生进行了关于米非司酮用于EPL的定性、半结构化访谈。我们通过专业网络招募参与者,并有目的地对米非司酮的使用、实践类型、实践时间和马萨诸塞州的地理位置进行抽样,直到我们达到主题饱和。我们在主题分析框架下使用归纳和演绎编码分析访谈,以确定米非司酮使用的促进因素和障碍。结果:我们采访了19位妇产科医生;12例使用米非司酮治疗EPL,7例未使用米非司酮。参与者在私人执业(n = 12) ,学术实践(n = 6) ,或在具有联邦资格的健康中心工作(n = 1) 。7人接受了研究金培训,其中4人接受了复杂计划生育方面的培训。在新冠肺炎大流行期间,米非司酮用于EPL最常见的促进因素是获得当地区域专家的专业知识或协议、“冠军”的领导、堕胎护理的先前经验以及医院能力限制。最常见的障碍与美国食品药品监督管理局(FDA)实施的米非司酮风险评估和缓解策略(REMS)计划有关。此外,米非司酮与流产的关系是一些妇产科医生在EPL中使用米非司酮的障碍。结论:美国食品药品监督管理局米非司酮REMS计划对妇产科医生将米非司酮纳入EPL护理提出了实质性障碍。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Mifepristone use for early pregnancy loss: A qualitative study of barriers and facilitators among OB/GYNS in Massachusetts, USA.

Context: Early pregnancy loss (EPL) affects 1 million patients in the United States (US) annually, but integration of mifepristone into EPL care may be complicated by regulatory barriers, practice-related factors, and abortion stigma.

Methods: We conducted qualitative, semi-structured interviews among obstetrician-gynecologists in independent practice in Massachusetts, US on mifepristone use for EPL. We recruited participants via professional networks and purposively sampled for mifepristone use, practice type, time in practice, and geographic location within Massachusetts until we reached thematic saturation. We analyzed interviews using inductive and deductive coding under a thematic analysis framework to identify facilitators of and barriers to mifepristone use.

Results: We interviewed 19 obstetrician-gynecologists; 12 had used mifepristone for EPL and 7 had not. Participants were in private practice (n = 12), academic practice (n = 6), or worked at a federally qualified health center (n = 1). Seven had fellowship training, including four in complex family planning. The most common facilitators of mifepristone use for EPL were access to the expertise or protocols of local-regional experts, leadership from a "champion," prior experience with abortion care, and hospital capacity constraints during the COVID-19 pandemic. The most common barriers were related to the Mifepristone Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) Program imposed by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Additionally, mifepristone's affiliation with abortion was a barrier to its use in EPL for some obstetrician-gynecologists.

Conclusion: The FDA Mifepristone REMS Program presents substantial barriers to obstetrician-gynecologists incorporating mifepristone into their EPL care.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
3.40%
发文量
24
期刊介绍: Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health provides the latest peer-reviewed, policy-relevant research and analysis on sexual and reproductive health and rights in the United States and other developed countries. For more than four decades, Perspectives has offered unique insights into how reproductive health issues relate to one another; how they are affected by policies and programs; and their implications for individuals and societies. Published four times a year, Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health includes original research, special reports and commentaries on the latest developments in the field of sexual and reproductive health, as well as staff-written summaries of recent findings in the field.
期刊最新文献
Sexual choking/strangulation and its association with condom and contraceptive use: Findings from a survey of students at a university in the Midwestern United States. Understanding abortion legality and trimester of abortion care in Ohio, West Virginia and Kentucky, three abortion‐restrictive states Abortion assistance fund staff and volunteers as patient navigators following an abortion ban in Texas. Abortion-related crowdfunding post-Dobbs. Medicaid's role in alleviating some of the financial burden of abortion: Findings from the 2021-2022 Abortion Patient Survey.
×
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