Doctors' Voices Generate Support for Abortion Care: Results from a Nationally Representative Survey.

OBJECTIVE: We tested abortion messaging to develop evidence-based communication recommendations for doctors who provide abortion care. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted an on-line survey in a nationally representative sample of 1,215 people, using NORC's Amerispeak® Panel. We surveyed participants before and after viewing two brief videos featuring doctors who provide abortion care speaking about their work. Doctors' comments were grounded in strategic communications and applied psychology research and emphasized caregiving roles, avoided political-sounding punditry, and acknowledged abortion's complexities. We assessed participants' characterizations of doctors who provide abortion care, how these characterizations impact support for abortion restrictions and overall views on abortion legality. We analyzed pre-post data using descriptive statistics, t-tests and multivariable regression. RESULTS: Post-messaging more participants endorsed positive descriptors of doctors who provide abortion care (p<0.001,t=8.99); fewer endorsed negative descriptors (p<0.001,t=10.32). Increased post-messaging endorsement of positive descriptors predicted declines in support for abortion restrictions (AOR = 1.69,p<0.01); decreased endorsement of negative descriptors did not. After messaging, 37% of respondents said their views of doctors who provide abortion care made them less likely to support abortion restrictions, compared to 14% before (p<0.001,t=-6.9). After messaging there was more overall support for legal, accessible abortion and less for abortion being mostly illegal (46%→48% and 24%→22%,p<0.001;t=-4.11). CONCLUSIONS: When doctors who provide abortion care use messaging recommendations that include speaking about abortion's complexities and avoiding political-sounding punditry, they generate more support for legal abortion and less for restrictions. IMPLICATIONS: The voices of doctors who provide abortion care shape abortion public opinion. When doctors speak from caregiving perspectives, avoid punditry, and acknowledge abortion's complexities they generate more support for legal abortion and less for restrictions. However, audiences may not be aware a priori that ideas of doctors shape their views.

The Relationship Between Workplace Drug Policies, Opioid Misuse, and Psychological Distress: Evidence From the 2020 National Survey on Drug Use and Health.

Background: This study, using a nationally representative dataset of the U.S. workforce, examines how punitive workplace drug policies relate to opioid use/misuse and psychological distress. Methods: The sample included adults aged ≥18 years who participated in the National Survey on Drug Use and Health and were employed in 2020. Hierarchical multivariate logistical models were constructed to address the research questions. Results: The weighted, design-based estimates indicate that of 147 831 081 workers, 3.38% reported misusing opioids in the last 12 months. Having a punitive workplace policy was associated with higher rates of opioid use/misuse among workers aged ≤ 34 compared to their same-aged counterparts in nonpunitive workplaces, and among workers identifying as Black, Indigenous, or Person of Color who also experienced severe psychological distress the past year. Conclusion: Some employers may think drug testing policies are net-beneficial to worker well-being; these findings indicate such policies may interact in harmful ways with psychological distress.

Experience of stigma and harassment among respondents to the 2019 Canadian abortion provider survey.

OBJECTIVE: We conducted a national survey to assess the experiences of stigma and harassment among physicians and nurse practitioners providing abortions and abortion service administrators in Canada. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted an exploratory, cross-sectional, national, anonymized, online survey between July and December 2020. Subsections of the survey explored stigma and harassment experienced by respondents, including the 35-item Revised Abortion Providers Stigma Scale and open-ended responses. We analyzed the quantitative data to generate descriptive statistics and employed a reflexive thematic analysis to interpret open-ended responses. RESULTS: Three hundred fifty-four participants started the stigma and harassment section of the survey. Among low-volume clinicians (<30 abortions/year, 60%, n = 180) 8% reported harassment; 21% among higher volume clinicians (≥30 abortions/year, 40%, n = 119) and 47% among administrators (n = 39), most commonly picketing. The mean stigma score was 67.8 (standard deviation 17.2; maximum score 175). Our qualitative analysis identified five themes characterizing perceptions of stigma and harassment: concerns related to harassment from picketing, protestors, and the public; wanting protestor "bubble zones"; aiming to be anonymous to avoid being a target; not providing an abortion service; but also witnessing a safe and positive practice environment. CONCLUSIONS: Being a low-volume clinician compared to higher volume clinician and administrator appears to be associated with less harassment. Clinicians providing abortion care in Canada reported mid-range abortion-related stigma scores, and expressed strong concerns that stigma interfered with their abortion provision. Our results indicate that further de-stigmatization and protection of abortion providers in Canada is needed through policy and practice interventions including bubble zones. IMPLICATIONS: While Canadian abortion care clinicians and administrators reported relatively low incidence of harassment, our results indicate that they are concerned about stigma and harassment. However, as this was an exploratory survey, these data may not be representative of all Canadian abortion providers. Our data identify a need to support abortion clinicians and to bolster protections for dedicated abortion services.

Addressing Abortion Provider Stigma: A Pilot Implementation of the Providers Share Workshop in Sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America.

CONTEXT: In much of Sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America, abortion is legally restricted, and abortion providers experience stigma and legal jeopardy. The Providers Share Workshop group intervention has been shown to reduce provider stigma in the United States, but has not been evaluated in other settings. METHODS: In 2014-2015, the Providers Share Workshop was adapted and piloted among 59 abortion caregivers from three Sub-Saharan African countries and 93 caregivers from seven Latin American countries. Survey data collected before, directly following and six months after each workshop measured stigma, attitudes, and legal safety and advocacy engagement, using original items and adapted scales. Univariate analyses and baseline pairwise correlations were used to measure changes in outcomes over time, and between demographic characteristics and outcomes. Mixed-effects linear regressions and multivariable models controlling for demographics were used to assess changes in outcomes over time. RESULTS: Six months after workshop participation, total abortion stigma had decreased among caregivers in Sub-Saharan Africa and in Latin America (beta coefficients, -0.2 and -0.4, respectively). Unfavorable attitudes had decreased in Africa (-0.2) but not in Latin America, where attitudes were favorable to start; emotional exhaustion and depersonalization also had decreased in Africa (-2.9 and -1.2), and legal safety had increased (0.8). Increased total abortion stigma was negatively associated with legal safety, in both Africa and Latin America (-1.9 and -0.6), and with legal advocacy in Africa (-1.5). CONCLUSIONS: The Providers Share Workshop is a promising intervention to support the abortion care workforce in Sub-Saharan African and Latin American settings.

RESUMEN Contexto: En gran parte del África subsahariana y América Latina, el aborto está legalmente restringido y los proveedores de servicios de aborto experimentan estigma y riesgo legal. Se ha demostrado que la intervención grupal del Taller de Proveedores para Compartir Experiencias reduce el estigma del proveedor en los Estados Unidos, pero no se ha evaluado en otros entornos. Métodos: Entre 2014 y 2015, el Taller de Proveedores para Compartir Experiencias fue adaptado y puesto a prueba entre 59 proveedores de servicios de aborto de tres países del África subsahariana y 93 proveedores de servicios de siete países latinoamericanos. Los datos de la encuesta recopilados antes, inmediatamente después y seis meses después de cada taller, mediante el uso de elementos originales y escalas adaptadas, midieron el estigma, las actitudes y la seguridad jurídica, así como el compromiso con la defensa y promoción del aborto. Se utilizaron análisis univariados y correlaciones de referencia por pares para medir los cambios en los resultados a través del tiempo y entre la demografía y los resultados. Se utilizaron regresiones lineales de efectos mixtos y modelos multivariables que controlan las variables demográficas para evaluar los cambios en los resultados a través del tiempo. Resultados: Seis meses después de la participación en el taller, el estigma total del aborto había disminuido entre los proveedores en África y América Latina (coeficientes beta, ­0.2 y ­0.4, respectivamente). Las actitudes desfavorables habían disminuido en África (­0.2) pero no en América Latina, donde las actitudes eran favorables para el inicio; el desgste emocional y la despersonalización también habían disminuido en África (­2.9 y ­1.2, respectivamente) y la seguridad legal había aumentado (0.8). El aumento del estigma total del aborto se asoció negativamente con la seguridad jurídica, tanto en África como en América Latina (coeficientes beta, ­1.9 y ­0.6, respectivamente) y con la defensa jurídica en África (­1.5). Conclusiones: El Taller de Proveedores para Compartir Experiencias es una intervención prometedora para apoyar a la fuerza laboral de atención del aborto en entornos de África subsahariana y América Latina.

RÉSUMÉ Contexte: Dans une grande partie de l'Afrique subsaharienne et de l'Amérique latine, l'avortement est limité par la loi et ses prestataires sont en proie à la stigmatisation et au péril judiciaire. Comme l'indiquent les études, l'intervention du groupe Providers Share Workshop réduit cette stigmatisation aux États-Unis; elle n'a cependant pas été évaluée dans d'autres contextes. Méthodes: En 2014­2015, l'atelier Providers Share Workshop a été adapté et piloté auprès de 59 membres du personnel de soins de l'avortement de trois pays d'Afrique subsaharienne et 93 soignants de sept pays d'Amérique latine. Les données d'enquête collectées avant, directement après et six mois après chaque atelier ont mesuré la stigmatisation, les attitudes et l'engagement de sécurité et de défense juridique sur la base des questions originales et d'échelles adaptées. Les changements de résultats au fil du temps, et entre les caractéristiques démographiques et les résultats, ont été mesurés par analyses univariées et par corrélations par paires de référence. Des régressions linéaires à effets mixtes et des modèles multivariés tenant compte des caractéristiques démographiques ont servi à évaluer les changements de résultats au fil du temps. Résultats: Six mois après la participation à l'atelier, la stigmatisation totale de l'avortement s'était réduite parmi le personnel soignant d'Afrique et d'Amérique latine (coefficients bêta de ­0,2 et ­0,4, respectivement). Les attitudes défavorables étaient en baisse en Afrique (­0,2) mais pas en Amérique latine, où les attitudes étaient favorables dès le début; l'épuisement affectif et la dépersonnalisation étaient en baisse aussi en Afrique (­2,9 et ­1,2, respectivement), tandis que la sécurité juridique était en hausse (0,8). Une stigmatisation totale supérieure de l'avortement s'est révélée associée négativement avec la sécurité juridique, en Afrique aussi bien qu'en Amérique latine (coefficients bêta de ­1,9 et ­0,6, respectivement), et avec la défense juridique en Afrique (­1,5). Conclusions: L'atelier Providers Share Workshop est une intervention prometteuse de soutien du personnel de soins de l'avortement en Afrique subsaharienne et en Amérique latine.

Trusted Colleagues or Incompetent Hacks? Development of the Attitudes About Abortion-Providing Physicians Scale.

BACKGROUND: Many physicians who provide abortion care report feeling marginalized within medicine. Because abortion care can require consultation with many types of physicians, physician opinions of providers may have implications for quality of care. However, no measure of physicians' attitudes about abortion-providing colleagues currently exists. METHODS: We developed a 24-item pool to measure perceptions of the motivations, competence, and standing within the medical profession of physicians who provide abortion care. We administered the survey to a sample of 1,640 faculty physicians at a Midwestern teaching hospital. We used Stata SE/14.0 for all analyses. RESULTS: Our response rate was 34% (n = 560), comparable with other studies of physicians. Exploratory factor analysis resulted in a three-factor solution: opinion, motivations, and competence. The scale demonstrated good internal consistency. Attitudes were largely favorable: 84% of participants agreed that abortion providers provide necessary care for women and 81% felt that abortion providers contribute positively to society. Compared with those who felt abortion should be illegal in all circumstances, attitudes were more favorable among those who felt that abortion should be legal. We observed an inverse relationship between religious attendance and attitudes. Participants with children held more favorable attitudes compared with those without children. CONCLUSIONS: The Attitudes About Abortion-Providing Physicians Scale captures physicians' perceptions of their abortion-providing colleagues along three important dimensions: opinion, motivations, and competence. This sample of physicians held generally favorable views of their colleagues who provide abortion care.

Stigma and abortion complications: stories from three continents.

Complications from abortion, while rare, are to be expected, as with any medical procedure. While the vast majority of serious abortion complications occur in parts of the world where abortion is legally restricted, legal access to abortion is not a guarantee of safety, particularly in regions where abortion is highly stigmatised. Women who seek abortion and caregivers who help them are universally negatively "marked" by their association with abortion. While attention to abortion stigma as a sociological phenomenon is growing, the clinical implications of abortion stigma - particularly its impact on abortion complications - have received less consideration. Here, we explore the intersections of abortion stigma and clinical complications, in three regions of the world with different legal climates. Using narratives shared by abortion caregivers, we conducted thematic analysis to explore the ways in which stigma contributes, both directly and indirectly, to abortion complications, makes them more difficult to treat, and impacts the ways in which they are resolved. In each narrative, stigma played a key role in the origin, management and outcome of the complication. We present a conceptual framework for understanding the many ways in which stigma contributes to complications, and the ways in which stigma and complications reinforce one another. We present a range of strategies to manage stigma which may prove effective in reducing abortion complications.

Evaluation of Abortion Stigma in the Workforce: Development of the Revised Abortion Providers Stigma Scale.

OBJECTIVES: We report on the development of a scale measuring abortion providers' experiences of stigma. STUDY DESIGN: Using previous measures, qualitative data, and expert review, we created a 49-item question pool. We administered questions to 315 abortion providers before participation in the Providers Share Workshop. We explored the factor structure and item quality using exploratory factor analysis. We assessed reliability using Cronbach's alpha. To test construct validity, we calculated Pearson's correlation coefficients between the stigma scales, the Maslach Burnout Inventory, and the K10 measure of psychological distress. We used Stata SE/12.0 for analyses. RESULTS: Factor analysis revealed a 35-item, five-factor model: worries about disclosure, internalized states, social judgment, social isolation, and discrimination (Cronbach's alphas 0.79-0.94). Our stigma measure was correlated with psychological distress (r = 0.40; p < .001), and with Maslach Burnout Inventory's emotional exhaustion (r = 0.27; p < .001), and depersonalization (0.23; p < .001) subscales, and was inversely correlated with Maslach Burnout Inventory's personal accomplishment subscale (r = -0.15; p < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Psychometric analysis of this scale reveals that it is a reliable and valid tool for measuring stigma in abortion providers, and may be helpful in evaluating stigma reduction programs.