Taryn M Valley, Meghan Zander, Laura Jacques, Jenny A Higgins
{"title":"“获取的最大问题”:威斯康星州2011年第217号法案药物流产立法影响的供应商报告。","authors":"Taryn M Valley, Meghan Zander, Laura Jacques, Jenny A Higgins","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Abortion legislation in the United States determines people's access to services, including the abortion modality of their choice. In 2012, Wisconsin legislators passed Act 217, banning telemedicine for medication abortion and requiring the same physician to be physically present when patients signed state-mandated abortion consent forms and to administer abortion medications over 24 hours later.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>No research documented real-time outcomes of 2011 Act 217 in Wisconsin; this study documents providers' descriptions of the effects of Wisconsin abortion regulations on providers, patients, and abortion care in the state.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We interviewed 22 Wisconsin abortion care providers (18 physicians and 4 staff members) about how Act 217 affected abortion provision. We coded transcripts using a combined deductive and inductive approach, then identified themes about how this legislation affects patients and providers.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Providers interviewed universally reported that Act 217 negatively affected abortion care, with the same-physician requirement especially increasing risk to patients and demoralizing providers. Interviewees emphasized the lack of medical need for this legislation and explained that Act 217 and the previously enacted 24-hour waiting period worked synergistically to decrease access to medication abortion, disproportionately affecting rural and low-income Wisconsinites. Finally, providers felt Wisconsin's legislative ban on telemedicine medication abortion should be lifted.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Wisconsin abortion providers interviewed underscored how Act 217, alongside previous regulations, limited medication abortion access in the state. This evidence helps build a case for the harmful effects of non-evidence-based abortion restrictions, which is crucial considering recent deferral to state law after the fall of Roe v Wade in 2022.</p>","PeriodicalId":38747,"journal":{"name":"Wisconsin Medical Journal","volume":"122 1","pages":"15-19"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10149116/pdf/nihms-1884561.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"'The Biggest Problem With Access': Provider Reports of the Effects of Wisconsin 2011 Act 217 Medication Abortion Legislation.\",\"authors\":\"Taryn M Valley, Meghan Zander, Laura Jacques, Jenny A Higgins\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Abortion legislation in the United States determines people's access to services, including the abortion modality of their choice. In 2012, Wisconsin legislators passed Act 217, banning telemedicine for medication abortion and requiring the same physician to be physically present when patients signed state-mandated abortion consent forms and to administer abortion medications over 24 hours later.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>No research documented real-time outcomes of 2011 Act 217 in Wisconsin; this study documents providers' descriptions of the effects of Wisconsin abortion regulations on providers, patients, and abortion care in the state.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We interviewed 22 Wisconsin abortion care providers (18 physicians and 4 staff members) about how Act 217 affected abortion provision. We coded transcripts using a combined deductive and inductive approach, then identified themes about how this legislation affects patients and providers.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Providers interviewed universally reported that Act 217 negatively affected abortion care, with the same-physician requirement especially increasing risk to patients and demoralizing providers. Interviewees emphasized the lack of medical need for this legislation and explained that Act 217 and the previously enacted 24-hour waiting period worked synergistically to decrease access to medication abortion, disproportionately affecting rural and low-income Wisconsinites. Finally, providers felt Wisconsin's legislative ban on telemedicine medication abortion should be lifted.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Wisconsin abortion providers interviewed underscored how Act 217, alongside previous regulations, limited medication abortion access in the state. This evidence helps build a case for the harmful effects of non-evidence-based abortion restrictions, which is crucial considering recent deferral to state law after the fall of Roe v Wade in 2022.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":38747,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Wisconsin Medical Journal\",\"volume\":\"122 1\",\"pages\":\"15-19\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10149116/pdf/nihms-1884561.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Wisconsin Medical Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Wisconsin Medical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:美国的堕胎立法决定了人们获得服务的机会,包括他们选择的堕胎方式。2012年,威斯康星州的立法者通过了第217号法案,禁止远程医疗用于药物流产,并要求同一名医生在患者签署州强制流产同意书时在场,并在24小时后给患者服用流产药物。目的:没有研究记录2011年威斯康星州第217号法案的实时结果;本研究记录了提供者对威斯康星州堕胎法规对提供者、患者和该州堕胎护理的影响的描述。方法:我们采访了22名威斯康星州堕胎服务提供者(18名医生和4名工作人员)关于第217法案如何影响堕胎服务。我们使用演绎和归纳相结合的方法对文本进行编码,然后确定有关该立法如何影响患者和提供者的主题。结果:接受采访的提供者普遍报告说,第217号法案对堕胎护理产生了负面影响,同一医生的要求尤其增加了患者的风险,使提供者士气低落。受访者强调这项立法缺乏医疗需求,并解释说,第217号法案和以前颁布的24小时等待期协同作用,减少了获得药物流产的机会,不成比例地影响了农村和低收入的威斯康星人。最后,供应商认为威斯康星州对远程医疗药物流产的立法禁令应该解除。结论:接受采访的威斯康星州堕胎提供者强调了第217号法案如何与以前的法规一起限制了该州的药物堕胎。这一证据有助于为非循证堕胎限制的有害影响建立一个案例,考虑到最近在2022年罗伊诉韦德案(Roe v Wade)败诉后推迟到州法律,这一点至关重要。
'The Biggest Problem With Access': Provider Reports of the Effects of Wisconsin 2011 Act 217 Medication Abortion Legislation.
Background: Abortion legislation in the United States determines people's access to services, including the abortion modality of their choice. In 2012, Wisconsin legislators passed Act 217, banning telemedicine for medication abortion and requiring the same physician to be physically present when patients signed state-mandated abortion consent forms and to administer abortion medications over 24 hours later.
Objective: No research documented real-time outcomes of 2011 Act 217 in Wisconsin; this study documents providers' descriptions of the effects of Wisconsin abortion regulations on providers, patients, and abortion care in the state.
Methods: We interviewed 22 Wisconsin abortion care providers (18 physicians and 4 staff members) about how Act 217 affected abortion provision. We coded transcripts using a combined deductive and inductive approach, then identified themes about how this legislation affects patients and providers.
Results: Providers interviewed universally reported that Act 217 negatively affected abortion care, with the same-physician requirement especially increasing risk to patients and demoralizing providers. Interviewees emphasized the lack of medical need for this legislation and explained that Act 217 and the previously enacted 24-hour waiting period worked synergistically to decrease access to medication abortion, disproportionately affecting rural and low-income Wisconsinites. Finally, providers felt Wisconsin's legislative ban on telemedicine medication abortion should be lifted.
Conclusion: Wisconsin abortion providers interviewed underscored how Act 217, alongside previous regulations, limited medication abortion access in the state. This evidence helps build a case for the harmful effects of non-evidence-based abortion restrictions, which is crucial considering recent deferral to state law after the fall of Roe v Wade in 2022.
期刊介绍:
The Wisconsin Medical Society is the largest association of medical doctors in the state with more than 12,000 members dedicated to the best interests of their patients. With that in mind, wisconsinmedicalsociety.org offers patients a unique source for reliable, physician-reviewed medical information. The Wisconsin Medical Society has been a trusted source for health policy leadership since 1841.