Telemedicine medical abortion service in Georgia: an evaluation of a strategy with reduced number of in-Clinic visits.

PURPOSE: To evaluate feasibility and acceptability of a medical abortion service that offers: a telemedicine visit (in place of an in-person visit) during a mandatory waiting period, and at-home follow-up with the use of multi-level pregnancy tests (MLPT). METHODS: Participants were screened for eligibility in clinic, and during the waiting period, received a telephone call to confirm desire to proceed with the service. Participants were mailed a study package containing mifepristone, misoprostol, two multi-level pregnancy tests, and instructions for their use. Follow-up consultation took place by phone to evaluate abortion completeness. The analysis was descriptive. RESULTS: One-hundred twenty-two participants were enrolled in the study, and 120 chose to proceed with the abortion after the waiting period and were sent a study package. One participant was lost to follow up. The majority of participants did not experience problems receiving the study package (94.1%, n = 112), took mifepristone (100%, n = 119), misoprostol (99.2%, n = 118), and MLPTs (99.1%, n = 116) as instructed, and forwent additional clinic visits (91.6%, n = 109). All participants were satisfied with the service. Most participants had a complete abortion without a procedure (95.8%, n = 114). CONCLUSIONS: The adapted telemedicine medical abortion service was feasible and satisfactory to participants and has the potential to make medical abortion more patient-centered where waiting periods are mandated.

Revolution in abortion care? Perspectives of key informants on the importance of abortion method choice in the era of telemedicine.

Patient choice of medical or surgical abortion is a standard of quality abortion care, but the choice of surgical abortion is constrained in England and Wales, particularly since the COVID-19 pandemic and introduction of telemedicine. This qualitative study explored the perspectives of abortion service providers, managers, and funders on the need to offer a choice of methods within early gestation abortion services in England and Wales. Twenty-seven key informant interviews were conducted between August and November 2021, and framework analysis methods were used. Participants presented arguments both for and against offering method choice. Most participants felt that it was important to maintain choice, although they recognised that medical abortion suits most patients, that both methods are very safe and acceptable, and that the priority for abortion services is to maintain timely access to respectful care. Their arguments related to practicalities around patient needs, the risk of reinforcing inequalities in access to patient-centred care, potential impacts on patients and providers, comparisons to other services, costs, and moral issues. Participants argued that constraining choice has a greater impact on those who are less able to advocate for themselves and there were concerns that patients may feel stigmatised or isolated when unable to choose their preferred method. In conclusion, although medical abortion suits most patients, this study highlights arguments for maintaining the option of surgical abortion in the era of telemedicine. More nuanced discussion of the potential benefits and impacts of self-management of medical abortion is needed.

Quality of information offered to women by drug sellers providing medical abortion in Nigeria: Evidence from providers and their clients.

Background: Evidence confirmed that the demand for medical abortion (MA) increased significantly during the COVID-19 outbreak in many developing countries including Nigeria. In an abortion-restrictive setting like Nigeria, local pharmacies, and proprietary patent medicine vendors (PPMVs) continue to play a major role in the provision of MA including misoprostol. There is the need to understand these providers' knowledge about the use of misoprostol for abortion and the quality of information they provide to their clients. This analysis is focused on assessing the quality of care provided by both drug seller types, from drug sellers' and women's perspectives. Methodology: This study utilized primary data collected from drug sellers (pharmacists and PPMVs) and women across 6 Local Government Areas in Lagos State, Nigeria. The core sample included 126 drug sellers who had sold abortion-inducing drugs and 386 women who procured abortion-inducing drugs from the drug sellers during the time of the study. We calculate quality-of-care indices for the care women received from drug sellers, drawing on WHO guidelines for medication abortion provision. The index based on information from the sellers had two domains-technical competency and information provided to clients, while the index from the women's perspectives includes an additional domain, client experience. Results: Results show that the majority of drug sellers in the sample, 56% (n = 70), were pharmacists. However, far more than half of women 60% (n = 233) had visited PPMVs. Overall, the total quality score amongst all drug sellers (mean 0.48, SD0.15) was higher than the total score calculated based on women's responses (mean 0.39, SD 0.21). Using our quality-of-care index, pharmacies and PPMVs seem to have similar technical competency (mean score of 0.23, SD 0.13 in both groups (range 0-1), whilst PPMV's performed better on the information provided to client domain (mean score of 0.79, SD 0.17 compared with pharmacies 0.69, SD 0.25). Based on women's reports, PPMVs scored better on both quality of care domains (technical competency and information provided to clients) compared with pharmacies. Program/Policy Implication: In resource-constrained settings such as Nigeria, particularly in the context of health emergencies like COVID-19, there is the need to continue to strengthen and engage PPMVs' capacity and skills in dispensing and administration of MA drugs as a harm reduction strategy. Also, there is the need to target frontline providers in pharmacies for training and skill upscale in MA provision.

Barriers to Telemedicine for First-Trimester Medical Abortion Provision in Canada in 2019

Objectives: In 2017, mifepristone became available for first trimester medical abortion (FTMA) in Canada. Shortly after, regulations permitted pharmacies to dispense mifepristone to patients, facilitating telemedicine provision. Our objective was to explore the barriers to providing FTMA using telemedicine in Canada in 2019. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional, national, self-administered, anonymized survey of physicians and nurse practitioners who provided abortion care in Canada in 2019. Online invitations were sent through professional health organizations using a modified Dillman technique to optimize recruitment. Questions elicited provider demographics and perceived barriers to offering telemedicine FTMA. We used R software for descriptive statistics. Results: Four hundred sixty-five clinicians were included for analyses, of which 388 reported providing FTMA. Among those, 44.0% reported using telemedicine (for consultations, while often obtaining testing) for FTMA. British Columbia respondents reported the highest proportion of telemedicine use at 63.8%;the lowest was in Québec (10.7%). The majority of FTMA respondents (77.7%) reported barriers to telemedicine. The most common barriers were inability to confirm gestational age with ultrasound (43.0%), and lack of provincial fee code to pay practitioners (30.2%), timely access to serum hCG testing (24.6%), and nearby emergency services (23.3%). Few reported facility regulations (8.9%) and provincial regulations (4.9%) as barriers to providing telemedicine-based care;provincial regulation barriers were most common in Québec (16.1%). Conclusions: Less than half of respondents reported providing some abortion care via telemedicine and the majority perceived barriers. Low-test medical abortion protocols developed during COVID-19 have the potential to overcome some barriers. Keywords: telemedicine;abortion, induced;surveys and questionnaires;Canada;delivery of health care;mifepristone

When More is Less: Emergency Powers, COVID-19 and Abortion in South Australia, 2020

In March 2020, when emergency powers legislation was invoked in South Australia to manage COVID-19, the South Australian Abortion Action Coalition (saaac) had been campaigning to decriminalise abortion since 2015. The group quickly realised that COVID-19 restrictions would amplify pre-existing difficulties for abortion providers and their patients and focused its efforts on persuading members of the government and the Chief Public Health Officer to use emergency powers to suspend aspects of abortion law to enable better and safer access to abortion services, specifically medical abortion via telehealth. This article offers an account of saaac’s 2020 campaign and asks why the needs of abortion patients and their healthcare providers were sidelined at the height of the COVID-19 lockdown in SA in early 2020. © The Author/s 2022

An Implementation Project to Expand Access to Teledoulas for Abortion Patients

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to describe the implementation and results of a patient outreach project to offer teledoula services to patients choosing medication abortion in Hawai'i during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We trained medical student volunteers at John A. Burns School of Medicine (JABSOM) as abortion teledoulas to remotely provide emotional support, education, pain management, and selfadvocacy. We offered teledoula services to pregnant patients presenting for medication abortion either in person or via telemedicine appointment at a university-based, outpatient family planning clinic. The teledoulas were notified by the abortion provider when a patient was interested in the service and the assigned teledoula contacted the patient by phone or text message. We conducted initial training and outreach in February 2021 and recorded completed pairings of teledoulas and patients through July 2021. Institutional review board (IRB) committee approval was waived for the study. RESULTS: Of the 15 medical students who attended the teledoula training, 12 (80%) were interested in participating. Of the interested medical students, 100% successfully paired with patients for support. Of the 194 patients who had a medication abortion in the 5 months that this service was offered, 37 (19.1%) were interested in participating in the program and all were contacted by a teledoula via text message. Thirty-three (89%) patients responded to the text message and successfully connected with a teledoula for support during their medication abortion. CONCLUSION: A teledoula service staffed by medical student volunteers can be successfully implemented and provide remote support for patients choosing medication abortion during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Medication Abortion Experiences Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Content Analysis of Online Reddit Posts

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic impacted abortion access, prompting initiatives to improve medication abortion access. We examined self-reported experiences and inquiries about medication abortion before and during the pandemic, using the anonymous platform Reddit. METHODS: We identified medication abortion-related Reddit posts across seven subreddits (e.g., r/Askwomen, r/abortion) using keywords linked to medication abortion (e.g., “abortion pill,” “misoprostol”). We restricted our search to pre-pandemic (September-November 2019) and during pandemic (April-June 2020) and filtered posts for experiences with or questions about medication abortion. We analyzed posts via inductive and iterative coding to characterize salient themes. We examined the prevalence of themes before and during the pandemic using chi-square tests. Institutional review board approval was obtained. RESULTS: Medication abortion-related posts increased by 134% during the pandemic (70 prior vs. 164 during). Frequent themes included sharing anxieties (34%), geographic barriers (22%), privacy/ secrecy surrounding abortion (21%), post-abortion relief (19%), concerns about pain/bleeding (18%), and medication seeking (12%). For posts during the pandemic, 56 (24%) mentioned COVID-19 as a barrier;more posts expressed concerns about efficacy during than prior to COVID-19 (17% vs. 3%, P<.05). We did not detect a statistically significant change in posts specifying self-managed abortion (23% vs. 27%), teleabortion (9% vs. 16%), or clinic abortion (46% vs. 32%) before versus during COVID-19. Nine posts (7%) specified interest in medication abortion above 11 weeks. CONCLUSION: Individuals share abortion experiences and seek support and advice on Reddit. Nearly a quarter of posts reported COVID-19 being a barrier to abortion access. However, concerns about abortion access, emotions surrounding abortion, and adviceseeking were prevalent across time periods.

Effectiveness and acceptability of "at home" versus "at hospital" early medical abortion - A lesson from the COVID-19 pandemic: A retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Since the lockdown caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, restrictions on hospitals' activity forced healthcare practitioners to innovate in order to provide continuity of care to patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficiency of a newly established protocol for medical abortion and to measure the level of satisfaction of the patients who experienced abortion at home. METHODS: This retrospective study compared all the patients who had an early medical abortion at up to 9 weeks of gestation during the two drastically different periods between December 2018 and March 2021 ("hospital" and "home" groups). We evaluated the expulsion of the gestational sac as a primary outcome. The rates of infection, hemorrhage, retained trophoblastic material and need for surgical management were also assessed. A survey was also used to measure the satisfaction and acceptability of the method. RESULTS: The rate of expulsion of pregnancy was not significantly different between the two groups: 92.9% in hospital versus 99% at home. Early retained trophoblastic material and surgical interventions were higher in the hospital group. No significant difference was observed for the remaining outcomes. Moreover, the level of acceptability was similar in both groups, though patients felt safer in the "hospital" group. CONCLUSION: Switching an early medical abortion protocol from expulsion of pregnancy in hospital to expulsion of pregnancy at home is effective and acceptable to women, and may be associated with decreased rate of retained trophoblastic material. Further larger studies are needed to test the long-term result of this protocol.

The Case for Telemedical Early Medical Abortion in England: Dispelling Adult Safeguarding Concerns.

Access to abortion care has been hugely affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. This has prompted several governments to permit the use of telemedicine for fully remote care pathways, thereby ensuring pregnant people are still able to access services. One such government is that of England, where these new care pathways have been publicly scrutinised. Those opposed to telemedical early medical abortion care have raised myriad concerns, though they largely centre on matters of patient safeguarding. It is argued that healthcare professionals cannot adequately carry out their safeguarding duties if the patient is not in the room with them. These concerns lack empirical support. Emerging evidence suggests that safeguarding processes may, in fact, be more effective within telemedical abortion care pathways. In this article, we address two specific safeguarding concerns: (1) that a remote consultation prevents a healthcare professional from identifying instances of abuse, and (2) that healthcare professionals cannot reliably confirm the absence of coercion during a remote consultation. We demonstrate that such concerns are misplaced, and that safeguarding may actually be improved in telemedical care pathways as victims of abuse may find it easier to engage with services. It is inevitable that some individuals will fall through the net, but this is unavoidable even with in-person care and thus does not constitute a strong critique of the use of telemedicine in abortion care. These safeguarding concerns set aside, then, we argue that the current approval that enables telemedical early medical abortion should be afforded permanence.

Expansion of a direct-to-patient telemedicine abortion service in the United States and experience during the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: To present updated evidence on the safety, efficacy and acceptability of a direct-to-patient telemedicine abortion service and describe how the service functioned during the COVID-19 pandemic. STUDY DESIGN: We offered the study at 10 sites that provided the service in 13 states and Washington DC. Interested individuals obtained any needed preabortion tests locally and had a videoconference with a study clinician. Sites sent study packages containing mifepristone and misoprostol by mail and had remote follow-up consultations within one month by telephone (or by online survey, if the participant could not be reached) to evaluate abortion completeness. The analysis was descriptive. RESULTS: We mailed 1390 packages between May 2016 and September 2020. Of the 83% (1157/1390) of abortions for which we obtained outcome information, 95% (1103/1157) were completed without a procedure. Participants made 70 unplanned visits to emergency rooms or urgent care centers for reasons related to the abortion (6%), and 10 serious adverse events occurred, including 5 transfusions (0.4%). Enrollment increased substantially with the onset of COVID-19. Although a screening ultrasound was required, sites determined in 52% (346/669) of abortions that occurred during COVID that those participants should not get the test to protect their health. Use of urine pregnancy test to confirm abortion completion increased from 67% (144/214) in the 6 months prior to COVID to 90% (602/669) in the 6 months during COVID. Nearly all satisfaction questionnaires (99%, 1013/1022) recorded that participants were satisfied with the service. CONCLUSIONS: This direct-to-patient telemedicine service was safe, effective, and acceptable, and supports the claim that there is no medical reason for mifepristone to be dispensed in clinics as required by the Food and Drug Administration. In some cases, participants did not need to visit any facilities to obtain the service, which was critical to protecting patient safety during the COVID-19 pandemic. IMPLICATIONS: Medical abortion using telemedicine and mail is effective and can be safely provided without a pretreatment ultrasound. This method of service delivery has the potential to greatly improve access to abortion care in the United States.

COVID-19 impact in abortions' practice, a regional French evaluation.

INTRODUCTION: On March 14, 2020, France has entered into stage 3 of the COVID-19 pandemic. The French National Health Agency (Haute Autorité de Santé) has urgently recommended the use of medical abortion at home between 7 and 9 weeks of gestation and telemedicine for medical abortion consultations. The main objective of this study was to assess whether the emergency measures undertaken for the management of abortions during the COVID-19 pandemic led to practice changes, and to obtain practitioners' opinions regarding the continuation of these measures. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This was a retrospective, quantitative, online self-administered survey from August 6, 2020 to October 2, 2020, aimed at health workers performing abortions (midwives, general practitioners, gynecologists obstetricians and medical gynecologists) in the South and Corse regions in France. RESULTS: Among the 124 practitioners included, 59/77 (76.6 %) offered medical abortion at home between 7 and 9 weeks of gestation and 61/89 (68.5 %) of them wished to carry on this practice. 55/123 (44.7 %) practitioners offered telemedicine for medical abortion at home and 71/115 (61.7 %) of them wished to carry on this practice. DISCUSSION: The emergency measures implemented by the the French National Health Agency (Haute Autorité de Santé) for medical abortion are approved and followed by the majority of health workers performing abortions in the South and Corse regions. This measure may be extended out of the COVID-19 epidemic.

COVID-19 and abortion: The importance of guaranteeing a fundamental right.

Because of the COVID-19 Pandemic many problems have emerged in the organization of the National Health Systems. In Italy, a very serious problem is emerging which needs a rapid solution. Italian women are finding increasingly difficult to access abortion. These difficulties are related to the organizational changes that have occurred in many hospitals due to the emergency COVID-19. A possible solution would be to resort to the procedure of pharmacological abortion which, however, in Italy, is characterized by many limitations imposed by law. To protect the right to health of all women will need a reorganization of abortion procedures in Italy with implementation of telehealth services.

Medical Abortion Care During a Pandemic.

In keeping with federal policy, our state's laws do not permit medical abortion via telemedicine, not even during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak, a decision that endangers the lives of women, clinical staff, nurses, and doctors. It also ties dedicated professionals to the clinic instead of being available to emergency rooms, bedsides, and intensive care units, knowing if their clinic doors close vulnerable women may be driven to desperate acts. Instead of 6 feet we could have been 3000 miles apart. Nearly 39% of abortions in the United States are medical abortions. Instructions, medication prescriptions, and routine follow-up can all be safely done remotely. When an examination or ultrasound are necessary, it can be accomplished with minimal staff and patient exposure. Instead, I am caught in a Kafkaesque moment in an already surreal time. Making medical abortion part of telemedicine during the COVID-19 pandemic could save the lives of women, nurses, staff, and doctors. Maybe yours, maybe even mine.