Reach, experience, and acceptability of an abortion self-care intervention in Bolivia: a mixed-methods evaluation

In 2018, Ipas Bolivia launched an abortion self-care (ASC) community intervention with the goal of increasing access to supportive, well-informed abortion support provided by community agents (CAs). Between September 2019 and July 2020, Ipas conducted a mixed-methods evaluation to assess the reach, outcomes, and acceptability of the intervention. We used logbook data maintained by CAs to capture demographic characteristics and ASC outcomes of people supported. We also conducted in-depth interviews with 25 women who had received support and 22 CAs who had provided support. 530 people accessed ASC support through the intervention, most of whom were young, single, educated women accessing abortion in the first trimester. Among the 302 people who self-managed their abortions, 99% reported having a successful abortion. No women reported adverse events. All women interviewed expressed satisfaction with the support provided by the CA and, in particular, with the information, lack of judgement, and respect they felt from CAs. CAs spoke highly about their experience and viewed their participation as a way to increase people's ability to exercise their reproductive rights. Obstacles included experiences of stigma, fears of legal repercussions, and difficulties dispelling misconceptions around abortion. Legal restrictions and abortion stigma continue to complicate access to safe abortion, and findings from this evaluation highlight important avenues for the effectiveness and expansion of ASC interventions, including legal support to people who have abortions and those who provide abortion support, building capacity of people as informed buyers, and ensuring that interventions reach rural and other often under-served people.

Stigma towards women requesting abortion and association with health facility staff facilitation and obstruction of abortion care in South Africa

Background

Abortion stigma has been shown to influence provider attitudes around abortion and may decrease provider willingness to participate in abortion care, or lead some to obstruct care. However, this link remains understudied.

Methods

The present study uses baseline data collected through a cluster-randomized controlled trial in 16 public sector health facilities in South Africa in 2020. A total of 279 clinical and non-clinical health facility workers were surveyed. Primary outcome measures included: 1) willingness to facilitate abortion care in eight hypothetical scenarios, 2) facilitation of abortion care in the last 30 days, and 3) obstruction of abortion care in the last 30 days. Logistic regression models were used to assess the association between level of stigma as measured through the Stigmatizing Attitudes, Beliefs and Actions Scale (SABAS) and the primary outcomes.

Results

Overall, 50% of respondents in the sample were willing to facilitate abortion care in each of the eight scenarios, with differences in willingness based on the abortion client's age and personal situation in each scenario. Over 90% reported facilitating abortion care in the last 30 days, but 31% also reported having obstructed abortion care in the last 30 days. Stigma was significantly associated with willingness to facilitate abortion care and actual obstruction of abortion care in the last 30 days. Controlling for covariates, odds of willingness to facilitate abortion care in every scenario decreased with every one-point increase in SABAS score (reflecting more stigmatizing attitudes), and odds of obstructing abortion care increased with every one-point increase in SABAS score.

Conclusions

Lower abortion stigma on the part of health facility workers was associated with willingness to facilitate abortion access but not actual facilitation of abortion services. Higher abortion stigma was associated with actual obstruction of an abortion service in the last 30 days. Interventions to reduce stigma towards women seeking abortion, and particularly negative stereotyping, among all health facility staff is key to ensuring equitable and non-discriminatory access to abortion.

Trial registration

Retrospectively registered on clinicaltrials.gov (ID: NCT04290832) on February 27, 2020.

Plain english summary

The link between stigma against women seeking abortion and decisions around whether to provide, abstain, or obstruct abortion care remains understudied. This paper assesses how stigmatizing beliefs and attitudes towards women seeking abortion in South Africa affects willingness to facilitate abortion care and actual facilitation or obstruction of abortion care in practice. A total of 279 clinical and non-clinical health facility workers were surveyed between February and March 2020. Overall, half of respondents in the sample were willing to facilitate abortion care in each of the eight scenarios, with important differences in willingness by scenario. Almost all respondents reported facilitating an abortion procedure in the last 30 days, but one in three also reported having obstructed abortion care in the last 30 days. More stigmatizing attitudes corresponded to decreased willingness to provide abortion care and increased odds of obstructing abortion care. Results show that stigmatizing attitudes, beliefs, and actions toward women who seek abortion shape how clinical and non-clinical staff in South Africa feel about their participation in abortion services and whether they obstruct this care. Facility staff hold great power in determining whose abortions are facilitated and whose are obstructed, resulting in stigma and discrimination being openly perpetuated. Continuous work to reduce stigma towards women seeking abortion among all health workers is key to ensuring equitable and non-discriminatory access to abortion for all.

Telehealth for Addressing Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights Needs During the COVID-19 Pandemic and Beyond: A Hybrid Telemedicine-Community Accompaniment Model for Abortion and Contraception Services in Pakistan

The COVID-19 pandemic led overburdened health care systems to deprioritize essential sexual and reproductive healthcare, including abortion and contraception care, while accelerating shifts in healthcare delivery to digital technologies. However, in many countries, including Pakistan, inequalities in access to digital technologies remain, presenting an opportunity for interventions that both increase access to deprioritized sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) services and overcome the digital divide in delivering digital solutions to those in need of SRHR services. In June 2020, Ipas Pakistan partnered with Sehat Kahani (SK), a local health care NGO and telehealth service, and an existing network of Lady Health Workers (LHWs) to launch a novel hybrid telemedicine-community accompaniment pilot. The model linked women via LHWs with mobile devices to online providers for telemedicine consultations for SRH, including abortion services, contraception, and other gynecological consultations. In June 2020, we trained 98 LHWs and 22 telehealth doctors. Between June 2020 and March 2021, a total of 176 women were referred by LHWs for telehealth consultations. Among women who received abortion services, nearly all (90%) reported complete uterine evacuation. No serious adverse events were reported. Overall satisfaction was high; 81% reported being satisfied, and 86% said it is likely they would recommend the telehealth service to others. Data show that the provision of SRHR services via a telehealth-accompaniment model can be successfully implemented in Pakistan. Outcome data show high satisfaction and good clinical outcomes for women accessing care through this model. However, more data are needed to understand the full potential of this model. Barriers to digital health models, such as poor or inconsistent internet access, remain in places like Pakistan, especially in rural settings. This approach has its limitations but should be considered as an option in settings with similarly established community health networks and inequitable access to digital health.

Factors affecting the persistent use of sharp curettage for abortion in public hospitals in Mexico

Objectives:

Dilation and curettage is an outdated abortion procedure no longer recommended by the World Health Organization. However, use of dilation and curettage remains high in some countries, including Mexico. We aim to understand the factors that contribute to persistent use of dilation and curettage in Mexico.

Methods:

We conducted a mixed-methods study in two phases: (1) secondary quantitative data analysis from 40 Ipas-supported public hospitals in Mexico and (2) 28 in-depth interviews in 9 Ipas-affiliated hospitals with doctors, nurses, and hospital administrators.

Results:

Among our sample, 41% of abortions less than 13 weeks performed in 2019 were treated with dilation and curettage, while this increased to 67% of abortions at or above 13 weeks. Only 18% of induced abortions were performed with dilation and curettage compared to 44% of post-abortion care procedures. The main factor identified as determining use of dilation and curettage in in-depth interviews was availability of abortion supplies, both in terms of cleaning, storage, and maintenance of supplies and in the budgeting and procurement of supplies. Other factors included confidence in the efficacy of other methods, attitudes toward different methods, skill and training, and perceived benefits to patients.

Conclusion:

Ensuring supplies for recommended abortion methods are available is a key lever for any intervention aimed at reducing dilation and curettage use. However, as the doctor performing the abortion decides which method to use, individual factors such as lack of skill and mistrust in other procedures can become a particularly obstinate barrier to recommended method use. Localizing decision-making power in the hands of doctors is problematic in that it places the doctor’s preference above that of the person receiving the abortion. It is important to look deeply at the power structures that contribute to doctor-oriented models of abortion care.

"We don't want problems": reasons for denial of legal abortion based on conscientious objection in Mexico and Bolivia

Background

The misuse of conscientious objection (CO) is a significant barrier to legal abortion access in many countries, especially in Latin America. We examine the reasons for denial of legal abortion services in Mexico and Bolivia and identify ways to mitigate the misuse of CO.

Methods

We conducted 34 in-depth interviews and 12 focus group discussions in two states in Mexico and four departments in Bolivia. Results were coded and categorized using a thematic analysis approach.

Results

Denial of abortion services based on CO is widespread in health facilities in Mexico and Bolivia and is primarily employed for reasons other than moral, religious, or ethical considerations. The main reasons for denial of services based on CO is lack of knowledge about abortion-related laws and fear of legal problems in abortion service provision. Conversely, the main reason to provide services is to comply with relevant laws. Denying services under the guise of CO negatively impacts pregnant people and health care teams, including fewer safe abortion options and increased workload and stigma, respectively. Most respondents cited training and education on abortion law as the foremost way to mitigate the negative impacts of the misuse of CO.

Conclusions

For many health personnel, knowing, understanding, and following the law is reason enough to provide abortion services. Individuals who object due to lack of knowledge about laws and fear of legal problems represent a key population that can be sensitized and equipped with the necessary information and resources to provide legal abortion services.