The legal and medical necessity of abortion care amid the COVID-19 pandemic

COVID-19 and abortion in the Ohio River Valley: A case study of Kentucky, Ohio, and West Virginia

INTRODUCTION

During early stages of COVID-19 in the United States, government representatives in Kentucky, Ohio, and West Virginia restricted or threatened to restrict abortion care under elective surgery bans. We examined how abortion utilization changed in these states.

METHODOLOGY

We examined COVID-19 abortion-related state policies implemented in March and April 2020 using publicly available sources. We analyzed data on abortions by method and gestation and experiences of facility staff, using a survey of 14 facilities. We assessed abortions that took place in February-June 2020 and February-June 2021.

RESULTS

In February-June 2020 the monthly average abortion count was 1916; 863 (45%) were medication abortions and 229 (12%) were ≥14 weeks gestation. Of 1959 abortions performed across all three states in April 2020, 1319 (67%) were medication abortions and 231 (12%) were ≥14 weeks gestation. The shift toward medication abortion that took place in April 2020 was not observed in April 2021. Although the total abortion count in the three-state region remained steady, West Virginia had the greatest decline in total abortions, Ohio experienced a shift from instrumentation to medication abortions, and Kentucky saw little change. Staff reported increased stress from concerns over health and safety and increased scrutiny by the state and anti-abortion protesters.

DISCUSSION

Although abortion provision continued in this region, policy changes restricting abortion in Ohio and West Virginia resulted in a decrease in first trimester instrumentation abortions, an overall shift toward medication abortion care, and an increase in stress among facility staff during the early phase of COVID-19.

Terrorist Attacks against Health Care Targets that Provide Abortion Services

INTRODUCTION

Terrorist attacks against hospitals and health care providers have disproportionally increased during the last decades. A significant proportion of these attacks targeted abortion clinics and abortion providers. In the light of the overturning of Roe v. Wade in 2022, an increase of anti-abortion terrorist attacks is anticipated. Therefore, it becomes imperative to gain further insight into the risk and characteristics of past terrorist attacks. This study aimed to review terrorist attacks against health care targets providing abortion services from 1970 through 2020.

METHODS

Data collection was performed using a retrospective database search through the Global Terrorism Database (GTD). The GTD was searched using the internal database functions for all terrorist attacks against abortion health care providers from January 1, 1970 - December 31, 2020. Temporal factors, location, attack and weapon type, and number of casualties or hostages were analyzed using descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

In total, 262 terrorist attacks were identified in five different countries. The majority (96.6%) occurred in the United States, with the highest counts during the last 20 years of the 20th century. Facility and infrastructure attacks were the most common attack types, followed by bombings and explosions. The attacks resulted in 34 injuries and nine fatalities. Kidnapping took place in three incidents. Of all successful attacks, 96.9% resulted in property damage.

CONCLUSION

Abortion-related health care facilities and providers have repeatedly been the target of terrorists over the past decades. Nearly all of these attacks took place in the United States, with the highest counts during the last 20 years of the 20th century.

Examining Healthcare Professionals’ Telehealth Usability before and during COVID-19 in Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional Study

COVID-19 has placed substantial stress on healthcare providers in Saudi Arabia as they struggle to avoid contracting the virus, provide continued care for their patients, and protect their own families at home from possible exposure. The demand for care has increased due to the need to treat COVID-19. This pandemic has created a surge in the need for care in select healthcare delivery specialties, forcing other nonurgent or elective care to halt or transition to telehealth. This study provides a timely description of how COVID-19 affected employment, telehealth usage, and interprofessional collaboration. The STROBE checklist was used. We developed a cross-sectional online survey design that is rooted and grounded in the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM). The TAM model allows us to identify characteristics that affect the use of telehealth technologies. The survey was deployed in November 2021 to local healthcare providers in Saudi Arabia. There were 66 individuals in the final sample. Both interprofessional satisfaction on frequency and quality were positively correlated with the frequency of interactions. The odds for satisfaction of frequency and quality were about 12 times (OR = 12.27) and 8 times 110 (OR = 8.24) more, respectively, for the participants with more than three times of interaction than the participants with no interaction at all. We also found that change in telehealth usage during the pandemic was positively associated with the Telehealth Usability Questionnaire (TUQ) scores. The estimated score for the participants who reported an increase in telehealth usage was 5.37, while the scores were lower for the participants reporting ‘no change’ and ‘decreased usage’. Additional training on telehealth use and integration to improve interprofessionalism is needed.

"I just was really scared, because it's already such an uncertain time": Exploring women's abortion experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic in Canada

OBJECTIVE

Travel restrictions, physical distancing and quarantine requirements, lockdowns, and stay-at-home orders due to COVID-19 have impacted abortion services across Canada. We aimed to explore the decision-making and care experiences of those who obtained abortion services during the COVID-19 pandemic and understand recent abortion patients' perspectives on demedicalized models of medication abortion service delivery.

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted 23 semi-structured, in-depth interviews with women across Canada who obtained abortion care after March 15, 2020. We audio-recorded and transcribed the telephone/Skype/Zoom interviews and managed our data with ATLAS.ti. We analyzed the English-language interviews for content and themes using inductive and deductive techniques.

RESULTS

The COVID-19 pandemic, and the associated economic and social support uncertainties, factored into many of our participants' decisions to obtain an abortion. Participants expressed relief and gratitude for being able to secure abortion care during the pandemic. Although women in our study reflected positively on their abortion care experiences, many felt that service delivery changes initiated because of the public health emergency exacerbated pre-COVID-19 barriers to care and contributed to feelings of loneliness and isolation. Our participants expressed considerable enthusiasm for demedicalized models of medication abortion care, including telemedicine services and behind-the-counter availability of mifepristone/misoprostol.

CONCLUSIONS

For our participants, abortion care constituted an essential health service. Our findings demonstrate the importance of continuing to provide access to safe, effective, and timely abortion care during public health emergencies. Exploring additional models of demedicalized medication abortion service delivery to address persistent access barriers in Canada is warranted.

IMPLICATIONS

Policymakers and clinicians should consider patient experiences as well as clinical evidence when considering regulatory changes to facilitate access to abortion care during public health emergencies. Identifying a multitude of ways to offer a full range of abortion services, including demedicalized models of medication abortion care, has the potential to meet significant needs in the COVID-19 era and beyond. The COVID pandemic highlights the need for demedicalized models, not only for the sake of those seeking abortion care but also to ease the burden on medical professionals during public health emergencies.

Pharmacological Abortion in a Pandemic: An Italian Medico-Legal Perspective

The limitations caused by the spread of the SARS-CoV2 virus have had repercussions on the voluntary termination of pregnancy. During the pandemic, Italy issued updated guidelines regarding voluntary termination of pregnancy by means of mifepristone and prostaglandin. This included news concerning the time limit and location in which this procedure could be accessed: updates partially recognize women’s needs, and they are into line with the European parliament’s recent exhortations. However, these updates do not change the previously provided responsibilities that lie with doctors. This article aimed to compare regulations concerning medical abortion in Italy and other countries, with a focus on recent Italian updates in the context of pandemic.

Influence of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic on Delays in and Barriers to Abortion

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is associated with delays in and barriers to accessing abortion, which are associated with higher gestational ages at the time of abortion.

The perspective of Canadian health care professionals on abortion service during the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic and pandemic response created novel challenges for abortion services. Canada was uniquely positioned to transition to telemedicine because internationally common restrictions on abortion medication were removed before the pandemic.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to characterize the experiences of abortion health care professionals in Canada during the COVID-19 pandemic and the impact of the pandemic response on abortion services.

METHODS

We conducted a sequential mixed methods study between July 2020 and January 2021. We invited physicians, nurse practitioners and administrators to participate in a cross-sectional survey containing an open-ended question about the impact of the pandemic response on abortion care. We employed an inductive codebook thematic analysis, which informed the development of a second, primarily quantitative survey.

RESULTS

Our initial survey had 307 respondents and our second had 78. Fifty-three percent were family physicians. Our first survey found respondents considered abortion access essential. We identified three key topicss: access to abortion care was often maintained despite pandemic-related challenges (e.g. difficulty obtaining tests, additional costs); change of practice to low-touch medication abortion care and provider perceptions of patient experience, including shifting demand, telemedicine acceptability and increased rural access. The second survey indicated uptake of telemedicine medication abortion among 89% of participants except in Quebec, where regulations meant procedures were nearly exclusively surgical. Restrictions did not delay care according to 76% of participants.

CONCLUSIONS

Canadian health care professionals report their facilities deemed abortion an essential service. Provinces and territories, except Quebec, described a robust pandemic transition to telemedicine to ensure access to services.

PODCAST

An accompanying podcast is available in the Supplementary Data, in which the authors Dr Madeleine Ennis and Kate Wahl discuss their research on how family planning care and access to abortion services have changed during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Disruptions to Abortion Care in Louisiana During Early Months of the COVID-19 Pandemic

Objectives. To examine changes in abortions in Louisiana before and after the COVID-19 pandemic onset and assess whether variations in abortion service availability during this time might explain observed changes. Methods. We collected monthly service data from abortion clinics in Louisiana and neighboring states among Louisiana residents (January 2018‒May 2020) and assessed changes in abortions following pandemic onset. We conducted mystery client calls to 30 abortion clinics in Louisiana and neighboring states (April‒July 2020) and examined the percentage of open and scheduling clinics and median waits. Results. The number of abortions per month among Louisiana residents in Louisiana clinics decreased 31% (incidence rate ratio = 0.69; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.59, 0.79) from before to after pandemic onset, while the odds of having a second-trimester abortion increased (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.91; 95% CI = 1.10, 3.33). The decrease was not offset by an increase in out-of-state abortions. In Louisiana, only 1 or 2 (of 3) clinics were open (with a median wait > 2 weeks) through early May. Conclusions. The COVID-19 pandemic onset was associated with a significant decrease in the number of abortions and increase in the proportion of abortions provided in the second trimester among Louisiana residents. These changes followed service disruptions.

Covid-19 Impacts on Florida's Healthcare Professionals

This study described how COVID-19 impacted employment, telehealth usage, and interprofessional collaboration. A cross-sectional survey was deployed in June 2020 to healthcare professionals in Florida. Job status was uniquely separated by profession, with more nurses and medical doctors reported having no effect, and more mental health counselors transitioned to telehealth. Over a third of rehabilitation providers reported being furloughed. Over forty percent of providers had no training in telehealth, yet 33.1% reported an increase in usage. Interprofessional interactions are lower across professions during the pandemic, compared with before. This study shows the need for additional training on telehealth and interprofessional collaboration.

COVID-19 and Independent Abortion Providers: Findings from a Rapid-Response Survey

CONTEXT

The ways in which the COVID-19 pandemic has affected abortion providers and abortion care, and the strategies clinics are adopting to navigate the pandemic, have not been well documented.

METHODS

In April-May 2020, representatives from 103 independent abortion clinics (i.e., those not affiliated with Planned Parenthood) completed a survey that included close-ended questions about how the pandemic, the public health response, and designations of abortion as a nonessential service had affected their clinic, as well as open-ended questions about the pandemic's impact. Analyses were primarily descriptive but included an exploration of regional variation.

RESULTS

All U.S. regions were represented in the sample. At 51% of clinics, clinicians or staff had been unable to work because of the pandemic or public health responses. Temporary closures were more common among clinics in the South (35%) and Midwest (21%) than in the Northeast and West (5% each). More than half of clinics had canceled or postponed nonabortion services (e.g., general gynecologic care); cancelation or postponement of abortion services was less common (25-38%, depending on type) and again especially prevalent in the South and Midwest. Respondents reported the pandemic had had numerous effects on their clinics, including disrupting their workforce, clinic flow and work practices; increasing expenses; and reducing revenues. State laws (including designations of abortion as nonessential) had exacerbated these difficulties.

CONCLUSIONS

Although independent abortion clinics have faced considerable challenges from the pandemic, most continued to provide abortion care. Despite this resiliency, additional support may be needed to ensure sustainability of these clinics.

Adoption of no-test and telehealth medication abortion care among independent abortion providers in response to COVID-19

OBJECTIVE

Access to abortion care in the United States (US) is restricted by numerous logistical and financial barriers, which have been further intensified by the COVID-19 pandemic. We sought to understand the ways in which COVID-19 prompted changes in clinical practices in abortion care among independent abortion clinics.

STUDY DESIGN

We surveyed independent US abortion clinics and documented changes in practice regarding the provision of abortion since March 1, 2020.

RESULTS

Among about 153 independent clinics invited, 100 clinics contributed relevant data and were included in the analytic sample. A total of 87% reported changes in protocols in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Reported changes included moving to telehealth (phone or video) for follow-up (71%), starting or increasing telehealth for patient consultations and screening (41%), reducing Rh testing (43%) and other tests (42%), and omitting the preabortion ultrasound (15%). A total of 20% reported allowing quick pickup of medication abortion pills, and 4% began mailing medications directly to patients after a telehealth consultation. Clinical practice changes were reported throughout all regions of the US, but facilities in the Northeast (73%) were more likely to report starting or increasing telehealth than facilities in the South (23%, p < .001).

CONCLUSION

The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated use of telehealth among independent abortion clinics, but many clinics, particularly those in the South, have been unable to make these changes. Other practices such as reducing preabortion ultrasounds were less common in all regions despite clinical guidelines and evidence supporting such changes in practice and positive benefits for public health and patient-centered care.

IMPLICATIONS

The COVID-19 pandemic has created a window of opportunity to remove barriers to abortion, including expanding telehealth and reducing preabortion tests. Clinics can strive for a culture shift towards simplifying the provision of medication abortion and routinely avoiding preabortion tests and in-person visits. Such changes in practice could have positive benefits for public health and patient-centered care.