First-trimester medical abortion with mifepristone 200 mg and misoprostol: a systematic review

Effectiveness and safety of telehealth medication abortion in the USA

Telehealth abortion has become critical to addressing surges in demand in states where abortion remains legal but evidence on its effectiveness and safety is limited. California Home Abortion by Telehealth (CHAT) is a prospective study that follows pregnant people who obtained medication abortion via telehealth from three virtual clinics operating in 20 states and Washington, DC between April 2021 and January 2022. Individuals were screened using a standardized no-test protocol, primarily relying on their medical history to assess medical eligibility. We assessed effectiveness, defined as complete abortion after 200 mg mifepristone and 1,600 μg misoprostol (or lower) without additional intervention; safety was measured by the absence of serious adverse events. We estimated rates using multivariable logistic regression and multiple imputation to account for missing data. Among 6,034 abortions, 97.7% (95% confidence interval (CI) = 97.2-98.1%) were complete without subsequent known intervention or ongoing pregnancy after the initial treatment. Overall, 99.8% (99.6-99.9%) of abortions were not followed by serious adverse events. In total, 0.25% of patients experienced a serious abortion-related adverse event, 0.16% were treated for an ectopic pregnancy and 1.3% abortions were followed by emergency department visits. There were no differences in effectiveness or safety between synchronous and asynchronous models of care. Telehealth medication abortion is effective, safe and comparable to published rates of in-person medication abortion care.

Association between previous surgical termination of pregnancy and pregnancy outcomes in frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycles of IVF/ICSI: a retrospective cohort study

This study aimed to evaluate the effect of previous surgical termination of pregnancy (STP) on pregnancy outcomes in women undergoing FET cycles of IVF/ICSI. Retrospective cohort study. Reproductive Center of Maternal and Child Health Care Hospital in Lianyungang city. Data were selected from all IVF/ICSI FET cycles performed between January 2014 and December 2020. A total of 761 cycles met the criteria were included in this study. The primary outcome measures were clinical pregnancy and live birth rates. Secondary outcome measures were biochemical pregnancy rate, spontaneous abortion rate, and preterm birth rate. After adjustments for a series of potential confounding factors, the previous STP was an influential factor in reducing FET cycle clinical pregnancy rate compared with women who had not previously undergone STP (OR = 0.614, 95% CI 0.413-0.911, P = 0.016). The effect of the previous STP on the live birth rate was not statistically significant. (OR = 0.745, 95% CI 0.495-1.122, P = 0.159). Also, an increase in the number of previous STPs relative to only 1-time abortion was an independent risk factor in reducing clinical pregnancy rate and live birth rate (OR = 0.399,95% CI 0.162-0.982, p = 0.046; OR = 0.32,95% CI 0.119-0.857, p = 0.023). Previous STP was an independent factor contributing to the decline in FET cycle clinical pregnancy rates.

Abortion Clients' Perceptions of Alternative Medication Abortion Service Delivery Options in Mississippi

OBJECTIVES

We assessed Mississippi abortion clients' perceptions of alternative medication abortion service delivery options that were restricted under state law but available elsewhere.

METHODS

We conducted in-depth interviews with medication abortion clients between November 2020 and March 2021 at Mississippi's only abortion facility. We described alternative service delivery models: telemedicine, medications by mail, and follow-up care in their community versus returning to the facility. We asked if participants would be interested in using any of these models, if available, and how use of each model would have changed their abortion experience. We used thematic analysis, organizing codes into common themes based on participants' preferences and concerns for each option.

RESULTS

Of the 25 participants interviewed, nearly all (n = 22) expressed interest in at least one option and reported that, had they been available, these would have alleviated cost, travel, and childcare barriers. Many believed these options would further ensure privacy, but a minority thought abortion was too sensitive for telemedicine or were concerned about mailing errors. Participants not interested in the alternative options also feared missing valued aspects of face-to-face care. Most did not return to the facility for follow-up (n = 19), citing financial and logistical barriers. Largely, participants were not interested in obtaining follow-up care in their community, citing concerns about provider judgment, stigma, and privacy.

CONCLUSIONS

Mississippi abortion clients were interested in models that would make abortion care more convenient while ensuring their privacy and allowing for meaningful client-provider interaction. These features of care should guide the development of strategies aimed at helping those in restricted settings, such as Mississippi, to overcome barriers to abortion care following the implementation of abortion bans in many states following the overturn of Roe v. Wade.

Pharmacists' experiences dispensing misoprostol and readiness to dispense mifepristone

BACKGROUND

Mifepristone, followed by misoprostol, is commonly used for medication abortion and early miscarriage care. Since mifepristone's approval in 2000, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has placed restrictions on where and how it could be dispensed, including applying a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy in 2011. In December 2021, the FDA removed the in-person dispensing requirement and, in January 2023, began allowing certified pharmacies to dispense the drug directly to patients.

OBJECTIVES

To explore pharmacist knowledge about misoprostol and mifepristone, experience dispensing misoprostol, as well as comfort and readiness to dispense mifepristone should federal regulations allow.

METHODS

We conducted in-depth interviews with 21 U.S.-based pharmacists and pharmacy trainees between June and December of 2021, a time when few pharmacists were allowed to dispense mifepristone.

RESULTS

Participants reported varied knowledge about medications for miscarriage and abortion but described themselves as generally knowledgeable about medications and reported strategies for learning about new medications. Most said they would feel ready to dispense mifepristone, and many described dispensing misoprostol without difficulty. Potential challenges specific to mifepristone dispensing included employer hesitation and colleague refusals. To assure successful dispensing, participants recommended basic training and fact sheets; relationships with prescribers for follow-up; and policies for prescription transfers in the event of refusal.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that nearly all participants would feel ready to dispense mifepristone with some basic training. Pharmacists self-report having the skills and resources to learn about new medications quickly. Our findings support the FDA's rule change allowing pharmacist dispensing of mifepristone and suggest that most challenges would stem from individual or institutional refusals.

Effects of medical abortion assisted by traditional Chinese medicine: A network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

To what extent traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) combined with mifepristone and misoprostol is beneficial for improving the complete abortion rate and duration of vaginal bleeding has been a subject of debate in the field of medical abortion.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the evidence regarding the complete abortion rate and duration of vaginal bleeding of medical abortion assisted by different kinds of TCM.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched electronic databases such as PubMed, Web of Science and Cochrane Library database, China National Knowledge Internet, Wan fang Database, VIP Database, and China Biology Medicine disc from 2000 to February 15, 2023.

SELECTION CRITERIA

The control group was medical abortion with mifepristone and misoprostol, and the experimental group was medical abortion assisted by TCM.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Major data extraction included sample size, age, medicine used for abortion, outcome measures. RevMan 5.3 and Stata 15.1 software were used to assess the literature quality and perform network meta-analysis, respectively.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 73 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with 11 683 patients and nine kinds of TCM were included in this study. Compared with mifepristone and misoprostol, eight kinds of TCM had statistical significance in improving the complete abortion rate. The effect value of Sancao decoction was 5.86 (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.53-13.58). Seven kinds of TCM shortened the duration of vaginal bleeding. The effect value of comfrey and trichosanthin decoction was -8.75 (95% CI -10.86 to -6.64).

CONCLUSIONS

This network meta-analysis showed that Lenge Zhumo decoction and Sancao decoction could have a large beneficial effect on complete abortion rate in medical abortion during early pregnancy, and comfrey and trichosanthin decoction could be the best TCM for shortening the duration of vaginal bleeding.

Effectiveness and safety of misoprostol-only for first-trimester medication abortion: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to update our 2019 systematic review of data on the effectiveness and safety of misoprostol-only for first-trimester abortion.

STUDY DESIGN

We searched PubMed on December 18, 2022, to find published articles describing the outcomes of treatment with misoprostol-only for abortion of viable intrauterine pregnancy at ≤91 days of gestation. From each article identified, two authors independently abstracted relevant data about each group of patients treated with a distinct regimen. We assessed the risk of bias using four defined indicators. We estimated the proportion of patients with treatment failure using meta-analytic methods as well as the proportion hospitalized or transfused after treatment. We examined associations between treatment failure and selected characteristics of the groups.

RESULTS

We identified 49 papers with 66 groups that collectively included 16,354 evaluable patients, of whom 2960 (meta-analytic estimate 15%, 95% CI 12%, 19%) had treatment failures. Of 9228 patients assessed for ongoing pregnancy after treatment, 521 (meta-analytic estimate 6%, 95% CI 5%, 8%) had that condition. Failure risk was significantly associated with misoprostol dose, the total allowed number of doses, the maximum duration of dosing, and certain indicators of risk of bias. Among 11,007 patients allowed to take at least three misoprostol doses, the first consisting of misoprostol 800 mcg administered vaginally, sublingually, or buccally, the meta-analytic estimate of the failure risk was 11% (95% CI 8%, 14%). At most, 0.2% of 15,679 evaluable patients were hospitalized or received transfusions.

CONCLUSIONS

Although some studies in this updated review were adjudicated to have a high risk of bias, the results continue to support the key conclusion of our 2019 analysis: misoprostol-only is effective and safe for the termination of first-trimester intrauterine pregnancy.

IMPLICATIONS

Misoprostol-only is a safe and effective option for medication abortion in the first trimester if mifepristone is unavailable or inaccessible.

Medication Abortion Safety and Effectiveness With Misoprostol Alone

Importance

Misoprostol-alone regimens for abortion may be more effective than previously thought.

Objective

To estimate the effectiveness of medication abortion with misoprostol alone among individuals self-managing their abortion.

Design, Setting, and Participants

For this prospective observational cohort study of callers to safe abortion hotlines and accompaniment groups in Argentina, Nigeria, and Southeast Asia, participants were recruited between July 31, 2019, and October 1, 2020, prior to starting their medication abortion. Eligible participants were 13 years or older, had no contraindications to medication abortion, and were not currently bleeding. Participants completed a baseline and 2 follow-up surveys. The analysis was restricted to participants who reported using misoprostol alone and was performed between January 6, 2022 and September 8, 2023.

Exposure

Self-managed medication abortion using misoprostol alone.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was effectiveness, defined as participant self-report of complete abortion without procedural intervention, measured at 1 week and 3 weeks after taking misoprostol. Secondary outcomes included method safety, measured by self-report of experiencing warning signs (eg, heavy bleeding, pain, fever, discharge) indicative of a potential complication and by medical treatment (eg, blood transfusion, intravenous fluids, overnight hospital stay) indicative of a potential adverse event. Additional outcomes included length of bleeding and cramping, time to expulsion, and experience of adverse effects.

Results

Among 1352 enrolled participants, 637 used misoprostol-alone regimens for abortion and were included in the analysis (591 [92.8%] from Nigeria, 45 [7.1%] from Southeast Asia, and 1 [0.2%] from Argentina; 384 [60.2%] aged 20-29 years; 317 [49.8%] with pregnancy durations <7 weeks and 205 [32.2%] with pregnancy durations between 7 and <9 weeks). At last follow-up after taking medication (median, 22 days; IQR, 21-26 days), 625 participants (98.1%; 95% CI, 96.7%-98.9%) had a complete abortion without procedural intervention. Potential adverse events were reported by 6 participants (0.9%; 95% CI, 0.4%-2.1%). Most participants experienced bleeding for less than 1 week (median, 4 days; IQR, 3-6 days) and expelled their pregnancy within 24 hours of starting the abortion process (median, 12 hours; IQR, 9-15 hours). Common side effects included nausea (335 participants [52.6%]), fever (232 [36.4%]), and diarrhea (181 [28.4%]).

Conclusions and Relevance

The findings suggest that misoprostol alone is a highly effective method of pregnancy termination. Future research should explore strategies to maximize the effectiveness of misoprostol alone in clinical and nonclinical settings.

A prospective, comparative study of clinical outcomes following clinic-based versus self-use of medical abortion

BACKGROUND

To determine whether clinical outcomes differ among women accessing a combined medical abortion regimen from a health clinic when compared with those accessing it from a pharmacy.

METHODS

We conducted a multicentre, prospective, comparative, non-inferiority study of participants aged ≥15 years seeking medical abortion from five clinics and five adjacent pharmacy clusters in three provinces of Cambodia. Participants were recruited in-person at the point of purchase (clinic or pharmacy). Follow-up for self-reported pill use, acceptability, and clinical outcomes occurred by telephone at days 10 and 30 after mifepristone administration.

RESULTS

Over 10 months, we enrolled 2083 women with 1847 providing outcome data: 937 from clinics and 910 from pharmacies. Most were early in their pregnancy (mean gestational age of 6.3 and 6.1 weeks, respectively) and almost all took the pills correctly (98% and 96%,). Additional treatment needed to complete the abortion was non-inferior for the pharmacy group (9.3%) compared with the clinic group (12.7%). More from the clinic group received additional care from a provider, such as antibiotics or diagnostics tests, than those from the pharmacy group (11.5% and 3.2%,), and one ectopic pregnancy (pharmacy group) was successfully treated. Most said they felt prepared for what happened after taking the pills (90.9% and 81.3%, respectively, p=0.273).

CONCLUSIONS

Self-use of a combined medical abortion product resulted in comparable clinical outcomes as use following a clinical visit, consistent with existing literature on its safety and efficacy. Registration and availability of medical abortion as an over-the-counter product would likely increase women's access to safe abortion.

Clinical outcomes of medication abortion using misoprostol-only: A retrospective chart review at an abortion provider organization in the United States

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of medication abortion with misoprostol-only among patients treated by an abortion provider organization in the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic.

STUDY DESIGN

We abstracted data from patients receiving misoprostol-only for abortion from December 2020 to December 2021. Two regimens were used, both allowing three to four doses of misoprostol 800 mcg every 3 hours but differing in the recommended administration routes (vaginal, buccal, or sublingual). We estimated the proportions of patients who had complete abortion and ongoing pregnancy in the two regimen groups in complete case analyses and after imputing missing outcomes based on pretreatment characteristics. We also estimated maximum effectiveness, assuming that all patients without known treatment failures had complete abortions. We tabulated serious adverse events.

RESULTS

We ascertained abortion outcomes for 476 (52%) of the total 911 treated patients. Of the 476 patients, 389 (82%) had complete abortion confirmed by test or history, and 45 (9%) had ongoing pregnancies detected after the provision of treatment. These proportions did not differ significantly between the two regimen groups in adjusted complete case analyses (p > 0.44). The results of imputed analyses were similar. Of the total 911 patients, at most 90% (95% confidence interval 88%, 92%) had complete abortion, and at least 5% (95% confidence interval 4%, 7%) had ongoing pregnancy. Serious adverse events were reported in three patients (0.6% of 487 patients with data for this outcome).

CONCLUSIONS

Our analysis suggests that the misoprostol-only regimens studied were safe and effective for most patients. Due to high loss to follow-up, observations from patients contacted after treatment likely somewhat underestimate true effectiveness.

IMPLICATIONS

Medication abortion with misoprostol-only was safe and produced complete abortion in most patients with follow-up. If loss to follow-up is high, effectiveness observed by clinics may misestimate true treatment efficacy.

Self-Managed Medication Abortion: Implications for Clinical Practice

Medication abortion represents more than 50 percent of abortions in the United States (US). Since its approval in the US in 2000, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has progressively relaxed the prescribing requirements such that currently, no office visit, in-person dispensing, or ultrasound is required. Obtaining medication for abortion online without medical supervision or evaluation is also possible. This article reviews the complications of medication abortion by examining major studies and delineates the risks specific to self-managed abortion to inform clinicians in caring for women.

Summary

Medication abortion has become the most common abortion method in the United States. This document provides a detailed history of the relaxation requirements on medication abortion and reviews the major studies on medication abortion complications including a discussion of their limitations. Finally, the paper delineates the ease of access to medication abortion without a health care provider and the risks associated with self-managed abortion. This paper is intended to provide information for clinicians who likely will be encountering increasing number of patients with such complications.

First trimester abortion protocols by facility type in Switzerland and potential barriers to accessing the service

Simplified first-trimester abortion protocols are well established. However, data on the use of medical or surgical abortion protocols across Switzerland is lacking. We report protocol characteristics in abortion care for two different facility types, hospital vs private practices (office-based) in Switzerland. Furthermore, we investigate an association between protocol characteristics and the likelihood of following through with the abortion at the same facility. We also report abortion outcomes of an office-based cohort where doctors use simplified abortion protocols. This study consists of two parts. (i) Between April and July, 2019, we collected data regarding medical and surgical abortion protocols of institutions offering abortions, in a nationwide survey. We assessed whether the proportion of patients who followed through with the abortion (primary outcome) after first appointment was associated with predefined protocol characteristics, considered to complicate access to abortion services, using generalised estimating equations. (ii) We analysed abortion outcomes of six selected office-based facilities from January, 2008, to December, 2018, using simplified abortion protocols in accordance with the Worlds Health Organisation (WHO) guidelines. (i) We included a total of 39 institutions. Hospitals showed more protocol-based barriers to abortion access compared with office-based facilities. The odds of undergoing an abortion after the first appointment were increased using protocols with minimal barriers. Overall, office-based facilities applied higher gestational age limits, required fewer appointments, and administered mifepristone more often after the first visit than did hospitals. (ii) We included a total of 5274 patients with an incidence of complications requiring surgery of 2.5% in line with rates reported in published literature. Only a few hospitals provide abortion care with easy access to medical and surgical abortion, whereas most office-based facilities do. Access to abortion services is generally crucial, and should be provided in a single visit whenever clinically permissible.

Single dose letrozole and misoprostol for termination of pregnancy through 63 days' gestation: A pilot study

OBJECTIVES

We conducted a pilot study to evaluate a single dose of letrozole 30 mg prior to misoprostol 800 mcg buccally for medication abortion STUDY DESIGN: We enrolled 40 participants seeking medication abortion up to 63 days' gestation at a site in Salt Lake City, UT. Participants received a single dose of letrozole 30 mg in-clinic followed 2 days later by misoprostol 800 mcg buccally at home. They took a second dose of misoprostol if they had no bleeding within 24 hours of the first. Participants returned 7 to 10 days later for assessment of abortion outcome and side effects RESULTS: Thirty-seven participants (93%) returned for follow-up and 2 (5%) went to another facility from which research staff obtained outcome data. Three-fourths (29/39, 74%, 95% CI: 60%-89%) had a complete abortion; 4 (10%, 95% CI: 0.3%-20%) had an incomplete abortion and opted for aspiration, and 6 (15%, 95% CI: 4%-27%) had an ongoing pregnancy. All subjects with follow-up reported taking the first dose of misoprostol. Ten (27%) took the second dose as well; only three did so due to no bleeding. Nineteen participants (51%) reported side effects after letrozole prior to misoprostol and two people (5%) rated these effects as severe. Side effects following misoprostol occurred in 33 participants (89%) and were as expected based on previous literature. No serious adverse events were reported CONCLUSION: A single dose of letrozole 30 mg followed by misoprostol had lower than desirable efficacy and does not warrant further study.

IMPLICATIONS

A single dose of letrozole does not appear to be an effective adjunct to misoprostol for medication abortion.

Short‐term efficacy and safety of early medical abortion in Japan: A multicenter prospective study

Purpose

To evaluate the short‐term efficacy and safety of a combined mifepristone‐misoprostol regimen in individuals seeking medical abortion at up to 63 days of gestational age.

Methods

This open‐label, multicenter, prospective study evaluated the short‐term efficacy and safety of medical abortion, with the primary outcome being the abortion success rate 24 h after misoprostol administration. The participants received 200 mg of mifepristone orally and 800 μg of misoprostol buccally in the hospital/clinic 36–48 h later. Bleeding and lower abdominal pain, which are the main symptoms associated with medical abortion, were recorded.

Results

The abortion success rate was 93.3% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 87.3–97.1%) within 24 h of misoprostol administration, 63.3% (95% CI: 54.05–71.94%) within 4 h, and 90.0% (95% CI: 83.18–94.73%) within 8 h. The median time from misoprostol administration to a successful abortion was 3.93 h. Bleeding was most commonly observed 0–4 h prior to the confirmation of gestational sac (GS) expulsion. The most intense lower abdominal pain occurred 0–1 h before the confirmation of GS expulsion.

Conclusion

The combined regimen of mifepristone and buccal misoprostol for medical abortion showed short‐term efficacy and a favorable safety profile.

Comparison of mifepristone plus misoprostol with misoprostol alone for first trimester medical abortion: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective

To compare mifepristone plus a misoprostol-combined regimen with misoprostol alone in the medical abortion of first trimester pregnancy.

Methods

An internet-based search of available literature was performed using text words contained in titles and abstracts. PubMed/Medline, Cochrane CENTRAL, EMBASE, and Google scholar were used to locate English-based articles published until December 2021. Studies fulfilling the inclusion criteria were selected, appraised, and assessed for methodological quality. The included studies were pooled for meta-analysis, and the results were presented in risk ratio at a 95% confidence interval.

Findings

Nine studies comprising 2,052 participants (1,035 intervention and 1,017 controls) were considered. Primary endpoints were complete expulsion, incomplete expulsion, missed abortion, and ongoing pregnancy. The intervention was found to more likely induce complete expulsion irrespective of gestational age (RR: 1.19; 95% CI: 1.14–1.25). The administration of misoprostol 800 mcg after 24 h of mifepristone pre-treatment in the intervention group more likely induced complete expulsion (RR: 1.23; 95% CI: 1.17–1.30) than after 48 h. The intervention group was also more likely to experience complete expulsion when misoprostol was used either vaginally (RR: 1.16; 95% CI: 1.09–1.17) or buccally (RR: 1.23; 95% CI: 1.16–1.30). The intervention was more effective in the subgroup with a negative foetal heartbeat at reducing incomplete abortion (RR: 0.45; 95% CI: 0.26–0.78) compared with the control group. The intervention more likely reduced both missed abortion (RR: 0.21; 95% CI: 0.08–0.91) and ongoing pregnancy (RR: 0.12; 95% CI: 0.05–0.26). Fever was less likely to be reported (RR: 0.78; 95% CI: 0.12–0.89), whereas the subjective experience of bleeding was more likely to be encountered (RR: 1.31; 95% CI: 1.13–1.53) by the intervention group.

Conclusion

The review strengthened the theory that a combined mifepristone and misoprostol regimen can be an effective medical management for inducing abortions during first trimester pregnancy in all contexts. Specifically, there is a high-level certainty of evidence on complete expulsion during the early stage and its ability to reduce both missed and ongoing pregnancies.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42019134213, identifier CRD42019134213.

Reproductive Health Policy in the United States: An American College of Physicians Policy Brief

The legal landscape around access to reproductive health care services was substantially altered after the Supreme Court decision in Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization. In the aftermath of the decision, some state governments have begun to impose stringent restrictions and complete bans on the provision of abortion, whereas others have sought to protect and expand access. Some have gone as far as imposing criminal and civil penalties on physicians and other clinicians who provide evidence-based, clinically indicated reproductive health care services and information that is guided by biomedical ethics and provided in the best interest of the patient's health and well-being. In several states, lawmakers have attempted and successfully used new approaches to enforcing and achieving these prohibitions, including prohibitions on crossing state lines to obtain abortion care, prohibitions on the mailing of medication abortion, and the authorization of third-party civil lawsuits. In this policy brief, the American College of Physicians (ACP) updates and expands on its previous public policy positions on abortion from its 2018 policy paper, "Women's Health Policy in the United States," to reflect this new reality. The College also offers policymakers and payers recommendations to promote equitable access to reproductive health care services and safeguard maternal health. ACP reaffirms its opposition to undue and unnecessary governmental interference in the patient-physician relationship that criminalizes the provision of health care made in the physician's clinical judgment and based on clinical evidence and the standard of care.

Trauma of abortion restrictions and forced pregnancy: urgent implications for acute care surgeons

In the aftermath of the Supreme Court's Dobbs vs. Jackson Women's Health decision, acute care surgeons face an increased likelihood of seeing patients with complications from both self-managed abortions and forced pregnancy in underserved areas of reproductive and maternity care throughout the USA. Acute care surgeons have an ethical and legal duty to provide care to these patients, especially in obstetrics and gynecology deserts, which already exist in much of the country and are likely to be exacerbated by legislation banning abortion. Structural inequities lead to an over-representation of poor individuals and people of color among patients seeking abortion care, and it is imperative to make central the fact that people of color who can become pregnant will be disproportionately affected by this legislation in every respect. Acute care surgeons must take action to become aware of and trained to treat both the direct clinical complications and the extragestational consequences of reproductive injustice, while also using their collective voices to reaffirm the right to abortion as essential healthcare in the USA.

Accounting for Misclassification and Selection Bias in Estimating Effectiveness of Self-managed Medication Abortion

BACKGROUND

Studies on the effectiveness of self-managed medication abortion may suffer from misclassification and selection bias due to self-reported outcomes and loss of follow-up. Monte Carlo sensitivity analysis can estimate self-managed abortion effectiveness accounting for these potential biases.

METHODS

We conducted a Monte Carlo sensitivity analysis based on data from the Studying Accompaniment model Feasibility and Effectiveness Study (the SAFE Study), to generate bias-adjusted estimates of the effectiveness of self-managed abortion with accompaniment group support. Between July 2019 and April 2020, we enrolled a total of 1051 callers who contacted accompaniment groups in Argentina and Nigeria for self-managed abortion information; 961 took abortion medications and completed at least one follow-up. Using these data, we calculated measures of effectiveness adjusted for ineligibility, misclassification, and selection bias across 50,000 simulations with bias parameters drawn from pre-specified Beta distributions in R.

RESULTS

After accounting for the potential influence of various sources of bias, bias-adjusted estimates of effectiveness were similar to observed estimates, conditional on chosen bias parameters: 92.68% (95% simulation interval: 87.80%, 95.74%) for mifepristone in combination with misoprostol (versus 93.7% in the observed data) and 98.47% (95% simulation interval: 96.79%, 99.39%) for misoprostol alone (versus 99.3% in the observed data).

CONCLUSIONS

After adjustment for multiple potential sources of bias, estimates of self-managed medication abortion effectiveness remain high. Monte Carlo sensitivity analysis may be useful in studies measuring an epidemiologic proportion (i.e., effectiveness, prevalence, cumulative incidence) while accounting for possible selection or misclassification bias.

PAPP-A as a screening tool for assessment of gestational age before medication abortion in an intended-use population

Introduction: Prior studies indicate that PAPP-A could serve as a marker of gestational age (GA) with the potential to determine eligibility for medication abortion. The authors validated the relationship between PAPP-A and GA in an actual-use population. Materials & methods: The authors collected blood samples, medical histories and ultrasound-determined GA from patients presenting for abortion services. They measured PAPP-A using two immunoassays and assessed diagnostic accuracy for predicting GA ≥71 days. Results: The Ansh Labs and R&D Systems immunoassays produced an area under the ROC curve of 0.982 (95% CI: 0.958-0.994) and 0.986 (95% CI: 0.963-0.996), respectively, for predicting GA ≥71 days. Conclusion: This validation study in an intended-use population confirmed that PAPP-A has a strong ability to distinguish pregnancies above and below 71 days' gestation. Clinical trial registration: NCT04232189 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Update on medication abortion follow-up options: many sizes to fit all

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To assess the efficacy, benefits, and limitations of available and emerging follow-up options for medication abortion.

RECENT FINDINGS

Medication abortion follow-up does not have to be a 'one size fits all' protocol. From most to least invasive, follow-up options include facility-based ultrasound, laboratory-based repeat serum beta-human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) testing, urine hCG testing (high sensitivity, low sensitivity, and multilevel pregnancy tests), self-assessment with symptom evaluation, and no intervention. Provider or facility-dependent follow-up, including ultrasound and serum testing are effective, but have several limitations, including needing to return to a facility and cost. Remote, client-led follow-up options, such as urine pregnancy testing and symptoms evaluation, are well tolerated and effective for ruling out the rare outcome of ongoing pregnancy after medication abortion and have several advantages. Advantages include being inexpensive and flexible. However, it is important to note that low-sensitivity and multilevel pregnancy tests are not available in all settings. In studies evaluating client-led follow-up with urine pregnancy tests, ongoing pregnancies were identified over half the time with symptoms alone.

SUMMARY

Guidelines from several professional organizations have aligned with the evidence and no longer recommend routine office-based follow-up. To ensure care is person-centered, providers should offer follow-up options that align with the comfort, logistical ability, and values of the client.

"They're forcing people to have children that they can't afford": a qualitative study of social support and capital among individuals receiving an abortion in Georgia

Abortion is common but highly stigmatized in the United States, and the overturning of Roe v. Wade severely restricted abortion access in many states across the nation. Data reveal that maternal morbidity and mortality are already increasing, and research suggests existing inequities in abortion access across racial/ethnic and socioeconomic groups will be exacerbated. Research has shown that social support (perceived and received aid from one's social network) and social capital (resources accessed through those social connections) can improve access to health services and decrease barriers to care. Given the escalating barriers to abortion, including longer travel distances, it is imperative to better understand the roles of social support and social capital within abortion access, especially for people living on lower incomes and people of color. Our team conducted in-depth interviews with post-abortion patients (n = 18) from an urban abortion clinic in Georgia in 2019 and 2020, shortly after a six-week gestational age abortion limit had been passed but before it was enacted. We examined how people described their social support and social capital - or lack thereof - when making decisions about their pregnancy and their ability to access abortion. We found that social support and social capital - economic support in particular - were key facilitators of both abortion access and parenting, but participants often experienced barriers to economic support within their social networks due to poverty, unstable partnerships, structural inequality, and abortion stigma. Women experienced constraints to their reproductive autonomy, wherein they had no alternatives but abortion. Our findings suggest that increased economic support and de-stigmatization of abortion are needed to improve reproductive autonomy. Our findings also indicate that restricting and outlawing abortion services is significantly detrimental to the well-being of pregnant people, their families and networks, and their communities by perpetuating cycles of poverty and deepening socioeconomic and racial/ethnic inequities.

Advancing Reproductive Health through Policy-Engaged Research in Abortion Care

Mifepristone medication abortion was first approved in China and France more than 30 years ago and is now used in more than 60 countries worldwide. It is a highly safe and effective method that has the potential to increase population access to abortion in early pregnancy, closer to home. In both Canada and the United States, the initial regulations for distribution, prescribing, and dispensing of mifepristone were highly restricted. However, in Canada, where mifepristone was made available in 2017, most restrictions on the medication were removed in the first year of its availability. The Canadian regulation of mifepristone as a normal prescription makes access possible in community primary care through a physician or nurse practitioner prescription, which any pharmacist can dispense. In this approach, people decide when and where to take their medication. We explore how policy-maker-engaged research advanced reproductive health policy and facilitated this rapid change in Canada. We discuss the implications of these policy advances for self-management of abortion and demonstrate how in Canada patients "self-manage" components of the abortion process within a supportive health care system.

"No Big Deal": A Qualitative Study of Pharmacists' Perspectives on Dispensing Mifepristone for Medication Abortion

INTRODUCTION

Until December 2021, the United States Food and Drug Administration impeded abortion access by restricting pharmacists from dispensing mifepristone, one of two drugs used in medication abortion. This study aimed to explore pharmacists' perspectives on dispensing mifepristone.

METHODS

We conducted semistructured interviews with pharmacists before and after participating in a pilot project where mifepristone was dispensed from their pharmacies. We thematically coded all interview transcripts, then summarized emergent themes related to pharmacists' support, comfort, experiences, and concerns around dispensing mifepristone.

RESULTS

Between May 2018 and July 2020, we interviewed 29 pharmacists (22 at baseline and 15 at follow-up, with 8 completing both interviews) from 5 pharmacies. At both baseline and follow-up, interviewees strongly supported pharmacists dispensing mifepristone, feeling it would improve quality of care by providing more convenient medication abortion access and streamlined service delivery and take advantage of pharmacists' expertise and availability. All pharmacists interviewed at follow-up reported dispensing mifepristone except two who were willing but did not have the opportunity. Pharmacists experienced few challenges dispensing mifepristone. Their main concern was perceived discomfort that other pharmacists and pharmacy staff may experience, particularly in conservative areas or small pharmacies where pharmacists' refusal to dispense mifepristone could impede abortion access.

CONCLUSIONS

Most pharmacists supported dispensing mifepristone and were comfortable doing so after education on mifepristone and medication abortion. They dispensed mifepristone without difficulty, in a similar process as dispensing other medications. With the recent removal of U.S. Food and Drug Administration restrictions prohibiting it, our findings support the feasibility of pharmacists dispensing mifepristone.

Medical methods for first trimester abortion

BACKGROUND

Medical abortion became an alternative method of pregnancy termination following the development of prostaglandins and antiprogesterone in the 1970s and 1980s. Recently, synthesis inhibitors of oestrogen (such as letrozole) have also been used to enhance efficacy. The most widely researched drugs are prostaglandins (such as misoprostol, which has a strong uterotonic effect), mifepristone, mifepristone with prostaglandins, and letrozole with prostaglandins. More evidence is needed to identify the best dosage, regimen, and route of administration to optimise patient outcomes. This is an update of a review last published in 2011.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effectiveness and side effects of different medical methods for first trimester abortion.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, Global Health, and LILACs on 28 February 2021. We also searched Clinicaltrials.gov and the World Health Organization's (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and reference lists of retrieved papers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared different medical methods for abortion before the 12th week of gestation. The primary outcome is failure to achieve complete abortion. Secondary outcomes are mortality, surgical evacuation, ongoing pregnancy at follow-up, time until passing of conceptus, blood transfusion, side effects and women's dissatisfaction with the method.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected and evaluated studies for inclusion, and assessed the risk of bias. We processed data using Review Manager 5 software. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 99 studies in the review (58 from the original review and 41 new studies). 1. Combined regimen mifepristone/prostaglandin Mifepristone dose: high-dose (600 mg) compared to low-dose (200 mg) mifepristone probably has similar effectiveness in achieving complete abortion (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.33; I2 = 0%; 4 RCTs, 3494 women; moderate-certainty evidence). Prostaglandin dose: 800 µg misoprostol probably reduces abortion failure compared to 400 µg (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.78; I2= 0%; 3 RCTs, 4424 women; moderate-certainty evidence). Prostaglandin timing: misoprostol administered on day one probably achieves more success on complete abortion than on day three (RR 1.94, 95% CI 1.05 to 3.58; 1489 women; 1 RCT; moderate-certainty evidence). Administration strategy: there may be no difference in failure of complete abortion with self-administration at home compared with hospital administration (RR 1.63, 95% CI 0.68 to 3.94; I2 = 84%; 2263 women; 4 RCTs; low-certainty evidence), but failure may be higher when administered by nurses in hospital compared to by doctors in hospital (RR 2.69, 95% CI 1.39 to 5.22; I2 = 66%; 3 RCTs, 3056 women; low-certainty evidence). Administration route: oral misoprostol probably leads to more failures than the vaginal route (RR 2.38, 95% CI 1.46 to 3.87; I2 = 39%; 3 RCTs, 1704 women; moderate-certainty evidence) and may be associated with more frequent side effects such as nausea (RR 1.14, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.26; I2 = 0%; 2 RCTs, 1380 women; low-certainty evidence) and diarrhoea (RR 1.80 95% CI 1.49 to 2.17; I2 = 0%; 2 RCTs, 1379 women). Compared with the vaginal route, complete abortion failure is probably lower with sublingual (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.22 to 2.11; I2 = 59%; 2 RCTs, 3229 women; moderate-certainty evidence) and may be lower with buccal administration (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.46; I2 = 0%; 2 RCTs, 479 women; low-certainty evidence), but sublingual or buccal routes may lead to more side effects. Women may experience more vomiting with sublingual compared to buccal administration (RR 1.33, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.77; low-certainty evidence). 2. Mifepristone alone versus combined regimen The efficacy of mifepristone alone in achieving complete abortion compared to combined mifepristone/prostaglandin up to 12 weeks is unclear (RR of failure 3.25, 95% CI 0.81 to 13.09; I2 = 83%; 3 RCTs, 273 women; very low-certainty evidence). 3. Prostaglandin alone versus combined regimen Nineteen studies compared prostaglandin alone to a combined regimen (prostaglandin combined with mifepristone, letrozole, estradiol valerate, tamoxifen, or methotrexate). Compared to any of the combination regimens, misoprostol alone may increase the risk for failure to achieve complete abortion (RR of failure 2.39, 95% CI 1.89 to 3.02; I2 = 64%; 18 RCTs, 3471 women; low-certainty evidence), and with more diarrhoea. 4. Prostaglandin alone (route of administration) Oral misoprostol alone may lead to more failures in complete abortion than the vaginal route (RR 3.68, 95% CI 1.56 to 8.71, 2 RCTs, 216 women; low-certainty evidence). Failure to achieve complete abortion may be slightly reduced with sublingual compared with vaginal (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.28; I2 = 87%; 5 RCTs, 2705 women; low-certainty evidence) and oral administration (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.11 to 2.99; I2 = 66%; 2 RCTs, 173 women). Failure to achieve complete abortion may be similar or slightly higher with sublingual administration compared to buccal administration (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.74; 1 study, 401 women).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Safe and effective medical abortion methods are available. Combined regimens (prostaglandin combined with mifepristone, letrozole, estradiol valerate, tamoxifen, or methotrexate) may be more effective than single agents (prostaglandin alone or mifepristone alone). In the combined regimen, the dose of mifepristone can probably be lowered to 200 mg without significantly decreasing effectiveness. Vaginal misoprostol is probably more effective than oral administration, and may have fewer side effects than sublingual or buccal. Some results are limited by the small numbers of participants on which they are based. Almost all studies were conducted in settings with good access to emergency services, which may limit the generalisability of these results.

Abortion With Pills: Review of Current Options in The United States

Interest in self-management approaches to abortion with pills in the United States preceded the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and has accelerated during this global health crisis. Coupled with the unclear future of legal abortion in the United States, clinical care providers need to be aware of the range of self-managed abortion approaches and of the varying levels of engagement with the formal health care system they entail. This article is intended to serve as a resource to inform providers of the current landscape of abortion with pills in the United States, while also describing possible shifts in the future that may result due to the ongoing pandemic and the continuing erosion of access to abortion care and services.

Clinical and service delivery implications of omitting ultrasound before medication abortion provided via direct-to-patient telemedicine and mail

OBJECTIVES

To compare outcomes among patients who did or did not have pre-abortion ultrasound or pelvic exam before obtaining medication abortion (MA) via direct-to-patient telemedicine and mail.

STUDY DESIGN

We analyzed data from participants screened for enrollment into the TelAbortion study at five sites from March 25 to September 15, 2020. We compared participants who had preabortion ultrasound or pelvic exam ("test-MA") to those who did not ("no-test MA"). Outcomes were: abortion not complete with pills alone (i.e., had procedure intervention or ongoing pregnancy), ongoing pregnancy separately, ectopic pregnancy, hospitalization and/or blood transfusion, and unplanned clinical encounters. We used propensity score weighting and multivariable logistic regression to adjust for baseline characteristics.

RESULTS

Our analysis included 287 participants who had no-test MA and 125 who had test-MA. Abortion was not complete with pills alone in 16of 287 (5.6%) no-test MA patients compared to 2of 123 (1.9%) test-MA patients (adjusted risk difference [aRD] = 4.3%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.4%-7.1%). No ectopic pregnancies were detected. Groups did not differ regarding hospitalization and/or blood transfusion (p = 0.76) or ongoing pregnancy diagnosis (p = 0.59). Unplanned clinical encounters were more common in no-test MA patients (35of 287, 12.5%) than test-MA patients (10of 125, 8.0%, aRD = 6.7%, 95% CI: 0.5%-13.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to patients who had pre-abortion ultrasound, patients who had no-test MA via telemedicine were more likely to have abortions that were not complete with pills alone and/or unplanned clinical encounters. However, both no-test and test-MA patients had similar and very low rates of ongoing pregnancy and hospitalization or blood transfusion.

IMPLICATIONS

Omitting pre-abortion ultrasound before provision of medication abortion via telemedicine does not appear to compromise safety or result in more ongoing pregnancies. However, compared to patients who have preabortion ultrasound, patients who do not have pre-abortion tests may be more likely to seek post-treatment care and have procedural interventions.

Pharmacists' knowledge, perspectives, and experiences with mifepristone dispensing for medication abortion

BACKGROUND

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) restricts dispensing of mifepristone for medication abortion to certified health care providers at clinical facilities, thus prohibiting pharmacist dispensing. Allowing mifepristone dispensing by pharmacists could improve access to medication abortion.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the feasibility of pharmacists dispensing mifepristone to patients who have undergone evaluation for eligibility and counseling for medication abortion by a clinician.

METHODS

Before providing a study training on medication abortion, we administered baseline surveys to pharmacists who participated in a multisite mifepristone-dispensing intervention. The survey assessed medication abortion knowledge-using a 15-item score-and perceptions about the benefits and challenges of the model. We administered follow-up surveys in the study's final month that also assessed the pharmacists' satisfaction and experiences with mifepristone dispensing. To investigate the association of the study intervention with the pharmacists' knowledge, perceptions, and experiences dispensing mifepristone, we conducted multivariable linear regression analyses using generalized estimating equation models, accounting for clustering by individual.

RESULTS

Among the 72 pharmacists invited from 6 pharmacies, 47 (65%) completed the baseline surveys, and 56 (78%) received training. At the study's end (mean 18 months later), 43 of the 56 pharmacists who received training (77%) completed the follow-up surveys. At follow-up, 36 (83%) respondents were very or somewhat satisfied with mifepristone dispensing, and 24 (56%) reported experiencing no challenges dispensing mifepristone. Four (6%) of the 72 pharmacists invited objected to participating in mifepristone dispensing. In regression analyses, average knowledge scores, perceived ease of implementation, and level of support for the pharmacist-dispensing model were higher at follow-up (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Most pharmacists were willing to be trained, dispensed mifepristone with few challenges when given the opportunity, were satisfied with the model, and had higher knowledge levels at follow-up. Our findings support removal of FDA's restriction on pharmacist dispensing of mifepristone.

Medical abortion offered in pharmacy versus clinic-based settings

BACKGROUND

Medical abortion is usually offered in a clinic or hospital, but could potentially be offered in other settings such as pharmacies. In many countries, pharmacies are a common first point of access for women seeking reproductive health information and services. Offering medical abortion through pharmacies is a potential strategy to improve access to abortion.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effectiveness and safety of medical abortion offered in pharmacy settings with clinic-based medical abortion.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, four other databases, two trials registries and grey literature websites in November 2020. We also handsearched key references and contacted authors to locate unpublished studies or studies not identified in the database searches.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We identified studies that compared women receiving the same regimen of medical abortion or post-abortion care in either a clinic or pharmacy setting. Studies published in any language employing the following designs were included: randomized trials and non-randomized studies including a comparative group.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently reviewed both retrieved abstracts and full-text publications. A third author was consulted in case of disagreement. We intended to use the Cochrane risk of bias tool, RoB 2, for randomized studies and used the ROBINS-I tool (Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Interventions) to assess risk of bias in non-randomized studies. GRADE methodology was used to assess the certainty of the evidence. The primary outcomes were completion of abortion without additional intervention, need for blood transfusion, and presence of uterine or systemic infection within 30 days of medical abortion.

MAIN RESULTS

Our search yielded 2030 records. We assessed a total of 89 full-text articles for eligibility. One prospective cohort study met our inclusion criteria. The included study collected data on outcomes from 605 women who obtained a medical abortion in Nepal from either a clinic or pharmacy setting. Both sites of care were staffed by the same auxiliary nurse midwives. Over all domains, the risk of bias was judged to be low for our primary outcome. During the pre-intervention period, the study's investigators identified a priori appropriate confounders, which were clearly measured and adjusted for in the final analysis. For women who received medical abortion in a pharmacy setting, compared to a clinic setting, there may be little or no difference in complete abortion rates (adjusted risk difference (RD)) 1.5, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.8 to 3.8; 1 study, 600 participants; low certainty evidence). The study reported no cases of blood transfusion, and a composite outcome, comprised mainly of infection complications, showed there may be little or no difference between settings (adjusted RD 0.8, 95% CI -1.0 to 2.8; 1 study, 600 participants; very low certainty evidence). The study reported no events for hospital admission for an abortion-related event or need for surgical intervention, and there may be no difference in women reporting being highly satisfied with the facility where they were seen (38% pharmacy versus 34% clinic, P = 0.87; 1 study, 600 participants; low certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Conclusions about the effectiveness and safety of pharmacy provision of medical abortion are limited by the lack of comparative studies. One study, judged to provide low certainty evidence, suggests that the effectiveness of medical abortion may not be different between the pharmacy and clinic settings. However, evidence for safety is insufficient to draw any conclusions, and more research on factors contributing to potential differences in quality of care is needed. It is important to note that this study included a care model where a clinician provided services in a pharmacy, not direct provision of care by pharmacists or pharmacy staff. Three ongoing studies are potentially eligible for inclusion in review updates. More research is needed because pharmacy provision could expand timely access to medical abortion, especially in settings where clinic services may be more difficult to obtain. Evidence is particularly limited on the patient experience and how the care process and quality of services may differ across different types of settings.

Termination of pregnancy services in Irish general practice from January 2019 to June 2019

OBJECTIVE

To describe how a general-practitioner-delivered community medical abortion service is provided in Ireland, including a description of the unique model of care delivered within the framework of new legislation. To investigate the characteristics and contraceptive choices of women attending in the first six months of the service.

STUDY DESIGN

Twenty-seven general practitioners conducted a retrospective chart review. We described the service and analyzed demographic characteristics, treatment outcomes, adverse events, and contraception use. We defined treatment success as complete abortion without surgical intervention.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven general practitioners from the Southern Task Group on Abortion and Reproductive Topics (START) group collected data from 475 women who had attended requesting medical abortion from January 1st 2019 to June 30th 2019. Out of these, 315 (66%) were more than 25 years old, and 261 (55%) had at least one child. The mean gestational age at initial presentation was 49 days. Five (1%) had a gestational age which exceeded 84 days. Four hundred and twenty (89%) proceeded with community medical abortion following an initial consultation. The process was completed without the need for surgical intervention in 412 (98%) cases. Six (1.4%) women had a mild post-treatment infection, and received community treatment with oral antibiotics. Thirty-three (7.9%) patients were referred to hospital for additional evaluation following treatment. Two hundred ninety (69%) adopted contraception post abortion; only 160 (34%) were using contraception prior to pregnancy.

CONCLUSION

The general-practitioner-delivered community medical abortion service described in the study is safe, effective, and accessible for the majority of, but not all women seeking abortion. The model of care used in Ireland provides an ideal opportunity to discuss contraceptive choice.

IMPLICATIONS STATEMENT

This review provides demographic, efficacy, and safety data for the general-practitioner-provided community medical abortion service in Ireland. An effective and largely accessible model of care is demonstrated. These findings can help inform legislative review, clinical guidelines, and generate hypotheses for future research.

The impact of COVID-19 on abortion access: Insights from the European Union and the United Kingdom

Government policies on abortion are a longstanding topic of heated political debates. The COVID-19 pandemic shook health systems to the core adding further to the complexity of this topic, as imposed national lockdowns and movement restrictions affected access to timely abortion for millions of women across the globe. In this paper, we examine how countries within the European Union and the United Kingdom responded to challenges brought by the COVID-19 crisis in terms of access to abortion. By combining information from various sources, we have explored different responses according to two dimensions: changes in policy and protocols, and reported difficulties in access. Our analysis shows significant differences across the observed regions and salient debates around abortion. While some countries made efforts to maintain and facilitate abortion care during the pandemic through the introduction or expansion of use of telemedicine and early medical abortion, others attempted to restrict it further. The situation was also diverse in the countries where governments did not change policies or protocols. Based on our data analysis, we provide a framework that can help policy makers improve abortion access.

US clinicians' perspectives on how mifepristone regulations affect access to medication abortion and early pregnancy loss care in primary care

OBJECTIVE

Protocols including mifepristone are the most effective medication regimens for medication abortion and early pregnancy loss (EPL) management. Both can be safely and effectively offered in primary care settings. Despite mifepristone's excellent safety record, the United States (US) Food and Drug Administration (FDA) heavily regulates provision. This exploratory study examines US primary care clinicians' perspectives on the effects of mifepristone restrictions, including FDA regulations, on access to medication abortion and EPL management in primary care.

STUDY DESIGN

In 2019, we conducted an online qualitative survey of US primary care clinicians recruited from six reproductive health-focused listservs. Open-ended questions queried about barriers to providing mifepristone and effects on patients when unable to access mifepristone in primary care. We iteratively coded and analyzed qualitative data using inductive thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Of our analytic sample of 113 respondents, one-third had mifepristone available in their current primary practice setting. Key barriers to provision stemmed from the FDA rule to stock and dispense mifepristone onsite, including logistical difficulties and resistance from health center leadership. Clinicians believed that lack of mifepristone in primary care resulted in negative patient experiences, including disrupted continuity of care, medically-unnecessary appointments, and undesired aspiration procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

FDA regulations that inhibit mifepristone provision in primary care create structural barriers to provision. This may result in physical, emotional, and financial burdens for patients.

IMPLICATIONS

When mifepristone is unavailable in primary care, some patients in need of abortion or EPL care may experience physical, emotional, and financial harms. Removing FDA restrictions is a critical step in reducing primary care barriers to mifepristone provision and improving access to timely, patient-centered medication abortion and EPL care.

The endometrial response to modulation of ligand-progesterone receptor pathways is reversible

OBJECTIVE

To study the impact of the progesterone receptor modulator (PRM), ulipristal acetate (UPA), on endometrial morphology and function.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional.

SETTING

University Research Institute.

PATIENT(S)

Endometrial biopsies from 16 patients with heavy menstrual bleeding with a structurally normal uterus or in association with structural abnormalities identified on radiological imaging (fibroids, adenomyosis or a combination of fibroids and adenomyosis).

INTERVENTION(S)

Participants received UPA (5 mg once daily) for three 12-week courses, each separated by 4 weeks without treatment.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Gene expression by real-time quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction, immunohistochemistry, and digital image analysis were analyzed to investigate the endometrial impact of modulation of progesterone receptor pathways upon expression of steroid receptors, steroid metabolizing enzymes, cell proliferation, and progesterone-regulated genes in the same patients at 3 time points: before, during, and after discontinuation of PRM treatment.

RESULT(S)

Ulipristal acetate treatment resulted in increased messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) levels of steroid receptors compared with pretreatment secretory endometrium; decreased mRNA levels of 17- and 11-beta-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenases compared with pretreatment proliferative endometrium and pretreatment secretory endometrium; reduced cell proliferation compared with pretreatment proliferative endometrium; and altered mRNA levels of progesterone-regulated genes. A strong consistency between immunohistochemistry-digital image analysis and real-time quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction results was evident. Alterations in the mRNA levels and endometrial morphology returned to a pretreatment phenotype after the cessation of PRM exposure.

CONCLUSION(S)

The endometrial impact of the modulation of progesterone receptor pathways with PRM (UPA) treatment is reversible.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Ulipristal acetate versus conventional management of heavy menstrual bleeding (UCON) trial (EudraCT 2014-003408-65; REC14/LO/1602).

Provision of medication abortion in Hawai'i during COVID-19: Practical experience with multiple care delivery models

Objective

To demonstrate the effectiveness of medication abortion with the implementation of telemedicine and a no-test protocol in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Study design

This is a retrospective cohort study of patients who had a medication abortion up to 77 days gestation at the University of Hawai‘i between April and November 2020. Patients had the option of traditional in clinic care or telemedicine with either in clinic pickup or mailing of medications. During this time, a no-test protocol for medication abortion without prior labs or ultrasound was in place for eligible patients. The primary outcome was the rate of successful medication abortion without surgical intervention. Secondary outcomes included abortion-related complications.

Results

A total of 334 patients were dispensed mifepristone and misoprostol, 149 (44.6%) with telemedicine with in-person pickup of medications, 75 (22.5%) via telemedicine with medications mailed, and 110 (32.9%) via traditional in person visits. The overall rate of complete medication abortion without surgical intervention was 95.8%, with success rates of 96.8, 97.1, and 93.6% for the clinic pickup, mail, and clinic visit groups, respectively. Success for those without an ultrasound performed prior to the procedure was 96.6%, compared to 95.5% for those with ultrasound. We obtained follow-up data for 87.8% of participants.

Conclusions

Medication abortion was safe and effective while offering multiple modes of care delivery including telemedicine visits without an ultrasound performed prior to dispensing medications.

Implications

Incorporating telemedicine and a no-test protocol for medication abortion is safe and has the potential to expand access to abortion care. All care models had low rates of adverse events, which contradicts the idea that the Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategyincreases the safety of medication abortion.

Quality of top webpages providing abortion pill information for Google searches in the USA: An evidence-based webpage quality assessment

BACKGROUND

In the United States, the internet is widely used to seek health information. Despite an estimated 18 million Google searches on abortion per year and the demonstrated importance of the abortion pill as an option for pregnancy termination, the top webpage search results for abortion pill searches, as well as the content and quality of those webpages, are not well understood.

METHODS

We used Google's Custom Search Application Programming Interface (API) to identify the top 10 webpages presented for "abortion pill" searches on August 06, 2018. We developed a comprehensive, evidence-based Family Planning Webpage Quality Assessment Tool (FPWQAT), which was used to assess webpage quality for the five top webpages presenting text-based educational content.

RESULTS

Of the top webpages for "abortion pill" searches, a plannedparenthood.com page was the top result and scored highest on our assessment (81%), providing high-quality and useable information. The other four webpages, a Wikipedia.com page and three anti-abortion information webpages, scored much lower on our assessment (14%-43%). These four webpages had lower quality of information in less useable formats. The anti-abortion pages also presented a variety of disinformation about the abortion pill.

CONCLUSIONS

Both the lack of accurate clinical content on the majority of top webpages and the concerning disinformation they contained raise concerns about the quality of online abortion pill information, while underlining challenges posed by Google search results to informed choice for consumers. Healthcare providers and consumers must be informed of online abortion pill content that is not based in current clinical evidence, while advocates and policymakers should push for online information that is credible and useable. These changes are imperative given the importance of sound abortion pill information for reproductive decision-making at a time when in-person abortion services are further challenged in the US.

Perspectives Among Canadian Physicians on Factors Influencing Implementation of Mifepristone Medical Abortion: A National Qualitative Study

PURPOSE

Access to family planning health services in Canada has been historically inadequate and inequitable. A potential solution appeared when Health Canada approved mifepristone, the gold standard for medical abortion, in July 2015. We sought to investigate the factors that influence successful initiation and ongoing provision of medical abortion services among Canadian health professionals and how these factors relate to abortion policies, systems, and service access throughout Canada.

METHODS

We conducted 1-on-1 semistructured interviews with a national sample of abortion-providing and nonproviding physicians and health system stakeholders in Canadian health care settings. Our data collection, thematic analysis, and interpretation were guided by Diffusion of Innovation theory.

RESULTS

We conducted interviews with 90 participants including rural practitioners and those with no previous abortion experience. In the course of our study, Health Canada removed mifepristone restrictions. Our results suggest that Health Canada's initial restrictions discouraged physicians from providing mifepristone and were inconsistent with provincial licensing standards, thereby limiting patient access. Once deregulated, remaining factors were primarily related to local and regional implementation processes. Participants held strong perceptions that mifepristone was the new standard of care for medical abortion in Canada and within the scope of primary care practice.

CONCLUSION

Health Canada's removal of mifepristone restrictions facilitated the implementation of abortion care in the primary care setting. Our results are unique because Canada is the first country to facilitate provision of medical abortion in primary care via evidence-based deregulation of mifepristone.

A Retrospective Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Mifepristone-Misoprostol Medical Abortions in the First Year at the Regina General Hospital

Objective

In July 2017, mifepristone–misoprostol (mife/miso) became available for medical abortion at the Regina General Hospital's Women's Health Centre (RGH WHC). We investigated whether the proportion of abortions performed medically changed as a result of the introduction of mife/miso, whether using mife/miso instead of the surgical alternative would result in cost savings to the health care system, and whether abortion type differed between patients residing in and outside of Regina.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective chart review of all 306 medical abortions from the RGH WHC between July 1, 2017 and June 30, 2018. We obtained medical and surgical abortion information from that year and the preceding one from an administrative database. Statistical methods were used to calculate the costs of mife/miso, methotrexate-misoprostol (MTX/miso) and surgical abortion, as well as cost-effectiveness ratios.

Results

The proportion of medical abortions increased from 15.4% in 2016/2017 to 28.7% in 2017/2018 (χ²₁ = 54.629; P < 0.001). Calculated costs for mife/miso, with and without complications were CAD $1173.70 and CAD $1708.90, respectively, versus CAD $871.10 and CAD $1204.10, respectively, for MTX/miso, and CAD $1445.95 and CAD $2261.95, respectively, for hospital-based vacuum aspiration. At a willingness-to-pay threshold of CAD $318 (the cost of mife/miso), statistical modelling showed a 61.3% chance that mife/miso was more cost-effective than surgical abortion and a 90.8% chance that it was more cost-effective than MTX/miso. Patients from Regina were significantly more likely (χ²₁ = 29.406; P < 0.001) to receive a medical abortion (34.9% of abortions) than those living outside of Regina (19.6% of abortions).

Conclusion

The proportion of abortions completed medically increased significantly over the period studied. Patients from Regina were more likely to receive medical abortion during both time periods. Mife/miso had a >50% probability of cost-effectiveness over both surgical and MTX/miso options.

Medication to Manage Abortion and Miscarriage

Abortion and miscarriage are common, affecting millions of US women each year. By age 45, one in four women in the USA will have had an abortion, and at least as many will have had a miscarriage. Most individuals seeking abortion services do so before 10 weeks' gestation when medication abortions are a safe and effective option, using a regimen of oral mifepristone followed by misoprostol tablets. When a pregnancy is non-viable before 13 weeks' gestation, it is referred to as an early pregnancy loss or miscarriage and can be managed using the same mifepristone and misoprostol regimen. Given their safety and efficacy, mifepristone and misoprostol can be offered in ambulatory settings without special equipment or on-site emergency services. As more patients find it difficult to access clinical care when faced with an undesired pregnancy or a miscarriage, it is important for general internists and primary care providers to become familiar with how to use medications to manage these common conditions. We summarize the most recent evidence regarding the use of mifepristone with misoprostol for early abortion and miscarriage. We discuss clinical considerations and resources for integrating mifepristone and misoprostol into clinical practice. By learning to prescribe mifepristone and misoprostol, clinicians can expand access to time-sensitive health services for vulnerable populations.

90 YEARS OF PROGESTERONE: Selective progesterone receptor modulators in gynaecological therapies

Abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB) is a chronic, debilitating and common condition affecting one in four women of reproductive age. Current treatments (conservative, medical and surgical) may be unsuitable, poorly tolerated or may result in loss of fertility. Selective progesterone receptor modulators (SPRMs) influence progesterone-regulated pathways, a hormone critical to female reproductive health and disease; therefore, SPRMs hold great potential in fulfilling an unmet need in managing gynaecological disorders. SPRMs in current clinical use include RU486 (mifepristone), which is licensed for pregnancy interruption, and CDB-2914 (ulipristal acetate), licensed for managing AUB in women with leiomyomas and in a higher dose as an emergency contraceptive. In this article, we explore the clinical journey of SPRMs and the need for further interrogation of this class of drugs with the ultimate goal of improving women's quality of life.

A repeat dose of misoprostol 800 mcg following mifepristone for outpatient medical abortion at 64-70 and 71-77 days of gestation: A retrospective chart review

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effectiveness of outpatient medical abortion with mifepristone 200 mg and two misoprostol 800 mcg doses at 64-70 and 71-77 days of gestation.

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted a retrospective chart review of medical abortion outcomes among clients with 64-77 day gestations at a Mexico City public clinic between February 2014 and November 2016 who took mifepristone 200 mg followed 24-48 h later by two doses of misoprostol 800 mcg four hours apart (first dose buccally, second dose sublingually). The primary outcome was successful medical abortion, defined as pregnancy expulsion without surgical intervention. We also assessed additional management and visits to other facilities. We compared outcomes by gestational age (64-70 vs 71-77 days).

RESULTS

Of 602 charts reviewed, we analyzed 232 and 218 in the respective groups for effectiveness; nearly 25% of clients were lost to follow up. Treatment success occurred in 231 (99.6%, 95% CI 97.6-100%) clients at 64-70 days and 213 (97.7%, 95% CI 94.7-99.3%) clients at 71-77 days (p = 0.11). Ongoing pregnancy occurred in 1 (0.4%, 95% CI 0-2.4%) and 3 (1.4%, 95% CI 0.3-4.0%) clients, respectively (p = 0.36). Two charts from the 71-77 days group documented visits to other facilities: one bleeding concern prior to scheduled follow up and a hemorrhage during an aspiration intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

Regimen effectiveness was high at 64-70 and 71-77 days among clients who attended follow up. However, with 25% attrition, it is difficult to draw definitive conclusions about effectiveness and associated safety.

IMPLICATIONS

Mifepristone 200 mg followed by two doses of misoprostol 800 mcg four hours apart is a promising medical abortion regimen to improve efficacy in pregnancies from 64-77 days of gestation as compared to regimens with an initial single misoprostol dose. Prospective research is recommended to achieve more robust efficacy estimates.

Systematic Review of the Effectiveness, Safety, and Acceptability of Mifepristone and Misoprostol for Medical Abortion in Low- and Middle-Income Countries

OBJECTIVE

Abortion-related complications remain one of the leading causes of maternal morbidity and mortality worldwide. Nearly half of all abortions are unsafe, and the vast majority of these occur in low- and middle-income countries. The use of mifepristone with misoprostol for medical abortion has been proposed and implemented to improve abortion safety.

DATA SOURCES

A systematic review of the literature was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and CINAHL.

STUDY SELECTION

Criteria for study inclusion were first-trimester abortion, use of mifepristone with misoprostol, and low- or middle-income country status as designated by the World Health Organization.

DATA EXTRACTION

Results for effectiveness, safety, acceptability, and qualitative information were assessed.

DATA SYNTHESIS

The literature search resulted in 181 eligible articles, 52 of which met our criteria for inclusion. A total of 34 publications reported effectiveness data on 25 385 medical abortions. The average effectiveness rate with mifepristone 200 mg and misoprostol 800 µg was 95% up to 63 days gestation. A sensitivity analysis was performed to assume that all women lost to follow-up failed treatment, and the recalculated effectiveness rate remained high at 93%. The average continuing pregnancy rate was 0.6%. A total of 22 publications reported safety and acceptability data on 17 381 medical abortions. Only 0.8% abortions required presentation to hospital, and 87% of patients found the side effects of treatment acceptable. Overall, 95% of women were satisfied with their medical abortion, 94% would choose the method again, and 94% would recommend this method to a friend. A total of 16 publications reported qualitative results and the majority supported positive patient experiences with medical abortion.

CONCLUSIONS

Mifepristone and misoprostol is highly effective, safe, and acceptable to women in low- and middle-income countries, making it a feasible option for reducing maternal morbidity and mortality worldwide.