Medical abortion in social context

Trends in medication abortion and the role of low-volume and nonmetropolitan mifepristone purchasers: 2008-2011 and 2014-2017

OBJECTIVE

The objective was to examine trends in the number of low-volume and nonmetropolitan mifepristone purchasers and their role in the expansion of medication abortion.

METHODS

We use deidentified data from Danco Laboratories, the sole distributor of mifepristone during the study period, to examine trends in mifepristone distribution. We focus on customers who purchased < 100 doses a year and a subset of those who purchased < 10 doses for the periods of 2008-2011 and 2014-2017. We use data from the Guttmacher Institute Abortion Provider Census (APC) studies in 2008 and 2017 to examine the extent to which some facilities that purchased mifepristone may be missing from Guttmacher's APC.

RESULTS

Between 2008 and 2017, the number of medication abortions increased 73%, though the number of mifepristone purchasers only increased 15%. The number of low-volume mifepristone customers, or those who purchased < 100 tablets of mifepristone per year, decreased 8% over the study period, while the number purchasing < 10 tablets per year decreased 14%. However, in recent years, low-volume customers were more likely to have purchased mifepristone in multiple years. In nonmetropolitan areas, the number of sites purchasing mifepristone increased slightly but the amount of mifepristone that was purchased more than doubled between 2008 and 2017.

CONCLUSIONS

While reliance on medication abortion increased substantially between 2008 and 2017, there is no evidence that this was due to an increase in the number of facilities that purchased low volumes of mifepristone.

IMPLICATIONS

While their numbers declined, abortion providers purchasing low volumes of mifepristone likely played an important role for the individuals they cared for. Access to abortion could increase if a wider network of health care practitioners, especially those in settings that do not currently provide abortions, was able to offer medication abortion.

Medical liability insurance as a barrier to the provision of abortion services in family medicine

Family physicians who wish to provide abortions have been subject to both denial of coverage by medical liability insurers and the imposition of large premium increases. These policy decisions by insurance companies raise questions about the role of family physicians in abortion care and about the autonomy of medical specialties in defining their scope of practice. We review the issues specific to abortion services in the primary care setting and examine the broader implications for the medical profession. Finally, we review how advocacy and improved regulation of the insurance industry could help to ensure that clinicians who are trained and willing to provide services to their patients are not limited by the decisions of medical liability insurers.

Medication abortion in Canada: a right-to-health perspective

The right to health under the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights, to which Canada is a signatory, entitles women to available, accessible, and acceptable abortion care. Abortion care in Canada currently fails this standard. Medication abortion (the use of drugs to terminate a pregnancy) could improve abortion care in Canada, but its potential remains unrealized. This is in part attributable to the unavailability of mifepristone, the safest and most effective pharmaceutical for medication abortion. Given that it could improve abortion care, we investigated why mifepristone remains unapproved in Canada, whether its unavailability is attributable to government inaction, and whether Canada is therefore failing to fulfill its obligations under the right to health.

Determinants of physician unwillingness to offer medical abortion using mifepristone

PURPOSE

We sought to identify factors associated with contemplating versus not contemplating offering medical abortion with mifepristone among physicians not opposed to it.

METHODS

We analyzed data from a Kaiser Family Foundation survey of a nationally representative sample of 790 American obstetrician/gynecologists and primary care physicians. Our study sample consisted of 419 physicians who were not personally opposed to medical abortion and could be classified as not actively considering (precontemplation) or actively considering (contemplation) offering mifepristone. We conducted multivariate logistic regression to predict being unlikely to offer mifepristone (i.e., in the precontemplation stage of change).

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

In 2001, 1 year after U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval, 5% of physicians surveyed were offering mifepristone. Among the 750 physicians not offering mifepristone, 57% were not opposed. Of those not opposed, 74% reported that they were unlikely to offer mifepristone in the next year (precontemplation) as compared to 23% who might offer it (contemplation). Independent predictors of being in the precontemplation stage were being a primary care versus OB/GYN physician (odds ratio [OR] 3.29, p = .02), being in private versus hospital-based practice (OR 2.40, p = .03), and lacking concerns about FDA regulations (OR 2.06, p = .01) or violence and protests (OR 1.93, p = .03) as barriers to offering mifepristone.

CONCLUSIONS

For precontemplation-stage physicians, the most efficient strategy for increasing the availability of medical abortion may be to design programs that emphasize clinical benefits and feasibility to stimulate interest in the procedure. For contemplation-stage physicians, the optimum approach may be one that helps to overcome barriers associated with FDA regulations and concerns about violence and protests.