Dataset Information

Factors associated with abortion at 12 or more weeks gestation after implementation of a restrictive Texas law.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

To examine factors associated with obtaining abortion at 12 or more weeks gestation in Texas after implementation of a restrictive law.

Study design

In this retrospective cohort study, we collected data from eight Texas abortion clinics that provided services at 12 or more weeks gestation from April 1, 2015 to March 30, 2016, after a restrictive abortion law enacted in November 2013 shuttered many of the state's clinics. We examined factors associated with obtaining in-clinic abortion services between 3-11 versus 12-24 weeks gestation including patient race-ethnicity, income level, and driving distance to the clinic using chi-square tests and calculating odds ratios. We further subcategorized abortion between 15-24 weeks to determine who may be most affected by a Texas law banning dilation and evacuation (D&E).

Results

Among 24,555 in-clinic abortions, 19.2% (n = 4,714) occurred at 12 or more weeks gestation. Compared to patients who obtained care between 3-11 weeks, those who obtained care at 12 or more weeks were more likely to be Black than White (OR 1.18; 95% CI 1.05-1.31), live ≤110% of the federal poverty level than have higher income (OR 2.09; 95% CI 1.94-2.26), and drive 50+ miles than 1-24 miles to obtain care (OR 1.25; 95% CI 1.15-1.38). These associations remained for those obtaining care between 15-24 weeks. Even after adjusting for race-ethnicity and driving distance, low-income patients had greater odds of obtaining care in between 15-24 weeks (aOR 1.52; 95% CI 1.21-1.91).

Conclusions

Patients obtaining abortion at 12 or more weeks gestation in Texas are more likely to be Black, low-income, and travel far distances to obtain in-clinic care.

Implications

In Texas, patients who are Black, low-income, and travel the farthest are more likely to obtain in-clinic abortion between 15-24 weeks gestation, commonly performed via D&E. If Texas Senate Bill 8 (SB8) banning D&E goes into effect, these patients may be prevented from obtaining care.

SUBMITTER: Goyal V

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7606493 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo assess whether indicators of limited access to services explained changes in rates of second-trimester abortion after implementation of a restrictive abortion law in Texas.MethodsWe used cross-sectional vital statistics data on abortions performed in Texas before (November 1, 2011-October 31, 2012) and after (November 1, 2013-October 31, 2014) implementation of Texas' abortion law. We conducted monthly mystery client calls for information about abortion facility closures and appointment wait times to calculate distance from women's county of residence to the nearest open Texas facility, the number of open abortion facilities in women's region of residence (facility network size), and days until the next consultation visit. We estimated mixed-effects logistic regression models to assess the association between obtaining abortion care after the law's implementation and having a second-trimester abortion (12 weeks of gestation or more), after adjustment for distance, network size, and wait times.ResultsOverall, 64,902 Texas-resident abortions occurred in the period before the law was introduced and 53,174 occurred after its implementation. After implementation, 14.5% of abortions were performed at 12 weeks of gestation or more, compared with 10.5% before the law (P<.001; unadjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.45; 95% CI 1.40-1.50). Adjusting for distance to the nearest facility and facility network size reduced the odds of having a second-trimester abortion after implementation (OR 1.17; 95% CI 1.10-1.25). Women living 50-99 miles from the nearest facility (vs less than 10 miles) had higher odds of second-trimester abortion (OR 1.24; 95% CI 1.11-1.39), as did women in regions with less than one facility per 250,000 reproductive-aged women compared with women in areas that had 1.5 or more facilities (OR 1.57; 95% CI 1.41-1.75). After implementation, women waited 1 to 14 days for a consultation visit; longer waits were associated with higher odds of second-trimester abortion.ConclusionIncreases in second-trimester abortion after the law's implementation were due to women having more limited access to abortion services.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:The objective was to assess whether information about abortion safety and awareness of abortion laws affect voters' opinions about medically unnecessary abortion regulations. STUDY DESIGN:Between May and June 2016, we randomized 1200 Texas voters to receive or not receive information describing the safety of office-based abortion care during an online survey about abortion laws using simple random assignment. We compared the association between receiving safety information and awareness of recent restrictions and beliefs that ambulatory surgical center (ASC) requirements for abortion facilities and hospital admitting privileges requirements for physicians would make abortion safer. We used Poisson regression, adjusting for political affiliation and views on abortion. RESULTS:Of 1200 surveyed participants, 1183 had complete data for analysis: 612 in the information group and 571 in the comparison group. Overall, 259 (46%) in the information group and 298 (56%) in the comparison group believed that the ASC requirement would improve abortion safety (p=.008); 230 (41%) in the information group and 285 (54%) in the comparison group believed that admitting privileges would make abortion safer (p<.001). After multivariable adjustment, the information group was less likely to report that the ASC [prevalence ratio (PR): 0.82; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.72-0.94] and admitting privileges requirements (PR: 0.76; 95% CI: 0.65-0.88) would improve safety. Participants who identified as conservative Republicans were more likely to report that the ASC (82%) and admitting privileges requirements (83%) would make abortion safer if they had heard of the provisions than if they were unaware of them (ASC: 52%; admitting privileges: 47%; all p<.001). CONCLUSIONS:Informational statements reduced perceptions that restrictive laws make abortion safer. Voters' prior awareness of the requirements also was associated with their beliefs. IMPLICATIONS:Informational messages can shift scientifically unfounded views about abortion safety and could reduce support for restrictive laws. Because prior awareness of abortion laws does not ensure accurate knowledge about their effects on safety, it is important to reach a broad audience through early dissemination of information about new regulations.

Project description:Abortion is regulated in Mexico at the state level, and it is permitted under certain criteria in all 32 states, except in Mexico City where first-trimester abortion is decriminalized. Yet, more than a million abortions occur in Mexico each year. But most terminations occurring outside of Mexico City are clandestine and unsafe due to profound stigma against the procedure, lack of trained providers, lack of knowledge of where to find a safe abortion and poor knowledge of the laws. While this situation is moderated by the increasing use of misoprostol, a relatively safe method of abortion, the safety of the procedure cannot be assured in restrictive legal contexts. The purpose of this study is to explore women's experiences with induced abortion in three federal entities with different legal contexts, and whether abortion seeking behavior and experiences differ across these settings. The study was carried out in three states, representing three different degrees of restrictiveness of abortion legislation. Queretaro with the "most restrictive" law, Tabasco with a "moderately restrictive" law, and Mexico state with the "least restrictive" law. We hypothesize that women living in more restrictive states will resort to the use of more unsafe and risky methods and providers for their abortion than their counterparts in less restrictive states. Women who recently obtained abortions were selected through snowball sampling and qualitative data were collected from them using semi-structured indepth interviews. Data collection took place between mid-2014 and mid-2015, with a final sample size N = 60 (20 from each state). Various themes involved in the process of abortion seeking behavior were developed from the IDIs and examined here: women's knowledge of the abortion law in their state, reasons for having an abortion; the methods and providers used and women's positive and negative experiences with abortion methods and providers used. Our results indicate that abortion safety is not associated with the restrictiveness of abortion legislation. Findings show that there is a new pattern of abortion service provision in Mexico, with misoprostol, a relatively safe and easy to use method, playing an important role. Nevertheless, while access to misoprostol tends to increase the safety of abortion, the improvement is moderated by women and their informants (relatives, friends and partners) not having accurate information on how to safely self-induce an abortion with misoprostol. On the other hand, some women manage to have safe abortion in illegal setting by going to Mexico City or with the support of NGOs knowlegeable on abortion. Findings demonstrate the importance of decriminalization of abortion, but meanwhile, harm reduction strategies, including promotion of accurate information about self-use of misoprostol where abortion is legally restricted will result in safe abortion.

Project description:ObjectiveTo explore the experiences of women in Scotland who accessed medical abortion at home up to 12 weeks' gestation, delivered via a telemedicine abortion service implemented in response to the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, to identify areas for improvement and inform service provision.DesignQualitative interview study.SettingAbortion service in one National Health Service health board in Scotland.Population or sampleTwenty women who accessed telemedicine abortion services and self-administered mifepristone and misoprostol at home up to 12 weeks' gestation.MethodsThematic analysis of semi-structured qualitative interviews, informed by the Framework analytic approach.Main outcome measuresWomen's experiences of accessing telemedicine for medical abortion at home, specifically: acceptability of the telephone consultation and remote support; views on no pre-abortion ultrasound scan; and self-administration of abortion medications at home.ResultsNovel study findings were three-fold: (1) participants valued the option of accessing abortion care via telemedicine and emphasised the benefits of providing a choice of telephone and in-person consultation to suit those with different life circumstances; (2) the quality of abortion care was enhanced by the telemedicine service in relation to access, comfort and flexibility, and ongoing telephone support; (3) participants described being comfortable with, and in some cases a preference for, not having an ultrasound scan.ConclusionsThis research demonstrates support for the continuation of telemedicine abortion services beyond the temporary arrangements in place during COVID-19, and lends weight to the argument that offering the option of telemedicine abortion care can enable women to access this essential health service. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: #Telemedicine provision of medical #abortion at home up to 12 weeks' gestation is acceptable and highly valued by #women #Research #SRHR @nbw80 @doctorjjrw @jeniharden @cameronsharon @mrc_crh @edinuniusher.

Project description:BackgroundThe Opioid Reduction Act (SB 273) took effect in West Virginia in June 2018. This legislation limited ongoing chronic opioid prescriptions to 30 days' supply, and first-time opioid prescriptions to 7 days' supply for surgeons and 3 days' for emergency rooms and dentists. The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of this legislation on reducing opioid prescriptions in West Virginia, with the goal of informing future similar policy efforts.MethodsData were requested from the state Prescription Drug Monitoring Program (PDMP) including overall number of opioid prescriptions, number of first-time opioid prescriptions, average daily morphine milligram equivalents (MME) and prescription duration (expressed as "days' supply") given to adults during the 64 week time periods before and after legislation enactment. Statistical analysis was done utilizing an autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) interrupted time series analysis to assess impact of both legislation announcement and enactment while controlling secular trends and considering autocorrelation trends. Benzodiazepine prescriptions were utilized as a control.ResultsOur analysis demonstrates a significant decrease in overall state opioid prescribing as well as a small change in average daily MME associated with the date of the legislation's enactment when considering serial correlation in the time series and accounting for pre-intervention trends. There was no such association found with benzodiazepine prescriptions.ConclusionResults of the current study suggest that SB 273 was associated with an average 22.1% decrease of overall opioid prescriptions and a small change in average daily MME relative to the date of legislative implementation in West Virginia. There was, however, no association of the legislation on first-time opioid prescriptions or days' supply of opioid medication, and all variables were trending downward prior to implementation of SB 273. The control demonstrated no relationship to the law.

Project description:BackgroundCaesarean sections often have no urgent indication and are electively planned. Research showed that elective caesarean section should not be performed until 39 + (0-6) weeks of gestation to ensure best neonatal and maternal health if there are no contraindications. This was recommended by various guidelines published in the last two decades. With this systematic review, we are looking for implementation strategies trying to implement these recommendations to reduce elective caesarean section before 39 + (0-6) weeks of gestation.MethodsWe performed a systematic literature search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and CINAHL on 3rd of March 2021. We included studies that assessed implementation strategies aiming to postpone elective caesarean section to ≥ 39 + (0-6) weeks of gestation. There were no restrictions regarding the type of implementation strategy or reasons for elective caesarean section. Our primary outcome was the rate of elective caesarean sections before 39 + (0-6) weeks of gestation. We used the ROBINS-I Tool for the assessment of risk of bias. We did a narrative analysis of the results.ResultsWe included 10 studies, of which were 2 interrupted time series and 8 before-after studies, covering 205,954 elective caesarean births. All studies included various types of implementation strategies. All implementation strategies showed success in decreasing the rate of elective caesarean sections performed < 39 + (0-6) weeks of gestation. Risk difference differed from - 7 (95% CI - 8; - 7) to - 45 (95% CI - 51; - 31). Three studies reported the rate of neonatal intensive care unit admission and showed little reduction.ConclusionThis systematic review shows that all presented implementation strategies to reduce elective caesarean section before 39 + (0-6) weeks of gestation are effective. Reduction rates differ widely and it remains unclear which strategy is most successful. Strategies used locally in one hospital seem a little more effective. Included studies are either before-after studies (8) or interrupted time series (2) and the overall quality of the evidence is rather low. However, most of the studies identified specific barriers in the implementation process. For planning an implementation strategy to reduce elective caesarean section before 39 + (0-6) weeks of gestation, it is necessary to consider specific barriers and facilitators and take all obstetric personal into account.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42017078231.