Depot medroxyprogesterone acetate concentrations in patients with and without the use of antiseizure medications.

OBJECTIVES: To measure plasma concentrations of medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA) in users with epilepsy treated with antiseizure medications and compare these to MPA concentrations in those without epilepsy. STUDY DESIGN: For this multisite cross-sectional study, we obtained a single blood sample from those with epilepsy treated with various antiseizure medications (n = 18) within the week before their next depot medroxyprogesterone injection. Among the participants without epilepsy (n = 20), 10 similarly were scheduled within the week prior to the next injection, and 10 were scheduled at earlier intervals to attempt to balance the time intervals between groups. MPA concentrations were determined by a validated assay. RESULTS: MPA concentrations were similar among those with epilepsy and controls and between groups with and without the use of enzyme-inducing medications. The lowest MPA concentrations, under 0.07 ng/mL, were observed among two of eight using enzyme-inducing antiseizure medications, one of 10 using noninducing medications, and one of 19 controls had concentrations below 0.2 ng/mL. CONCLUSIONS: In this exploratory study, lower MPA concentrations in some participants using enzyme-inducing antiseizure medications suggest a potential interaction that could reduce depot medroxyprogesterone efficacy.

Trauma-Informed Care Training in U.S. and Canadian Ob/Gyn Residencies.

This is a cross-sectional study investigating the prevalence and nature of trauma-informed care (TIC) training in obstetrics and gynecology residency programs. In our sample, 20% of programs had annual TIC training, 53% had less than annual training, and 27% had no training at all. Only 25.3% of respondents were satisfied with their current training in interpersonal trauma and TIC. A lack of facilitators to conduct such training was the primary barrier to implementing TIC. Significant opportunity exists to improve TIC education for Ob/Gyn trainees.

Association Between Restricted Abortion Access and Child Entries Into the Foster Care System.

Importance: The 2022 US Supreme Court decision Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization overturned federal protections to abortion care, allowing many states to severely restrict or ban access to abortion. Given the implications of the Dobbs ruling, there is a need to understand the full consequences of restricted abortion access. Before 2022, many states restricted access to safe and legal abortions through Targeted Regulation of Abortion Providers (TRAP) laws, which provide a historical mode for estimating the consequences of abortion restrictions. Objective: To use TRAP law enactment as a natural experiment to quantify the association between restricted abortion access and foster care entries. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cohort study, data on the enactment of TRAP laws and case-level data on foster care entries were used to estimate the association between restricted abortion access and foster care entries in each of the 50 US states and the District of Columbia. The sample included children conceived between January 1, 1990, and December 31, 2011, who were placed into foster care at any point between January 1, 2000, and December 31, 2020. Data analysis was performed from January 2023 to July 2023. Exposures: Restricted abortion access due to state-level TRAP laws during pregnancy. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was the number of children entering foster care in each state, measured by year of child conception. The analysis was performed using a generalized difference-in-differences design, comparing entries into foster care in states with TRAP laws to states without TRAP laws, before and after their implementation. Results: This study included 4 179 701 children who were placed into foster care during the study period, with 11 016 561 entries. More than half of the children were male (51.4%), and the mean (SD) age was 7.4 (5.2) years. There was an 11% increase in foster care placement after abortion access was restricted in states with TRAP laws, relative to states without TRAP laws (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 1.11 [95% CI, 1.01-1.23]). These laws had significant consequences for Black children (IRR, 1.15 [95% CI, 1.05-1.28]) and racial and ethnic minority children (IRR, 1.15 [95% CI, 1.02-1.30]). The increase in entries due to TRAP laws was particularly attributable to housing inadequacy (IRR, 1.21 [95% CI, 1.11-1.32]). Conclusions and Relevance: Restricted abortion access can have numerous consequences, and these findings reveal a heightened strain on the US foster care system, particularly affecting marginalized racial and ethnic communities and financially vulnerable families. These placements have been shown to have lifelong consequences for children and substantial costs for both states and the federal government. To further examine the widespread implications of the overturning of Roe v Wade, future studies should forecast the expected increase in foster care entries and estimate the expenditure needed to support these children.

The influence of advertising policy on information available online for abortion self-referral.

OBJECTIVE: Prior work shows that ads related to abortion services often feature crisis pregnancy centers instead of abortion providers. We investigated whether a change in Google's advertising policy that required advertisers to disclose whether they provided abortion services increased the proportion of ads facilitating abortion self-referral. STUDY DESIGN: We used a standardized protocol to search online for abortion services before, during, and after the policy change; we performed searches in August 2016 to June 2017, June 2019, and October 2019, respectively, using Google, Bing, and Yahoo search engines. We performed searches for the 25 most populous U.S. cities and the 43 state capitals not already included. We classified up to the first 5 ads as facilitating abortion referral, hindering abortion referral, or providing neutral content. We compared search engine results using a chi-square test. RESULTS: Among ads returned by Google, those shown after the policy change were significantly more likely to facilitate abortion self-referral (66.7% vs. 44.2%; p = 0.003) and slightly less likely to hinder abortion self-referral (33.3% vs. 40.6%; p = 0.33) compared to before the change. These findings were reversed for ads shown by Bing and Yahoo; ads returned after the change were significantly less likely to facilitate abortion self-referral (24.6% vs. 32.8%; p = 0.01) and significantly more likely to hinder self-referral (28.3% vs. 21.6%; p = 0.03) compared to before the change. CONCLUSION: A policy requiring advertisers to disclose whether they provide abortion services was associated with increasing the proportion of ads facilitating self-referral. Similar policies should be considered by all search engines. IMPLICATIONS: While the internet is a convenient source of information that individuals often use to locate abortion providers, the information may not actually lead searchers to services. Search engines should consider restricting abortion-related advertising to organizations that provide abortion services in order to ensure that individuals searching online for abortion services are able to locate services in a direct and timely manner.

Pregnancy Intention Screening in Patients With Systemic Rheumatic Diseases: Pilot Testing a Standardized Assessment Tool.

OBJECTIVE: Systemic rheumatic conditions affect reproductive-aged patients and often require potentially teratogenic medications. We assessed the feasibility and impact of a standardized pregnancy intention screening question (One Key Question [OKQ]) in a large academic rheumatology practice. METHODS: This 6-month pilot quality improvement initiative prompted rheumatologists to ask female patients aged 18 to 49 years about their pregnancy intentions using OKQ. We administered surveys to assess rheumatologists' barriers to and comfort with reproductive health issues. We performed chart reviews to assess uptake and impact on documentation, comparing charts with OKQ documented with 100 randomly selected charts eligible for pregnancy intention screening but without OKQ documented. RESULTS: When we compared 32 of 43 preimplementation responses with 29 of 41 postimplementation responses, the proportion of rheumatologists who reported they were very comfortable with assessing their patients' reproductive goals increased (31%-38%) and the proportion reporting obstetrics and gynecology (OB/GYN) referral challenges as barriers to discussing reproductive goals decreased (41%-21%). During the implementation period, 83 of 957 (9%) eligible patients had OKQ documented in their chart. Female providers were more likely to screen than male providers (odds ratio 2.42, 95% confidence interval 1.21-4.85). Screened patients were more likely to have their contraceptive method documented (P < 0.001) and more likely to have been referred to OB/GYN for follow-up (P = 0.003) compared with patients who were not screened with OKQ. CONCLUSION: Although uptake was low, this tool improved provider comfort with assessing reproductive goals, the quality of documentation, and the likelihood of OB/GYN referral. Future studies should examine whether automated medical record alerts to prompt screening increase uptake.

Prevalence of contraindications to progestin-only contraceptive pills in a multi-institution patient database.

OBJECTIVE: We calculated the prevalence of contraindications to progestin-only pills (POPs) among reproductive age women to evaluate the safety of over the counter provision. STUDY DESIGN: This descriptive study queried a multi-institution US database to identify women ages 10 to 45 presenting for preventive care, and a subset of this initial cohort also presenting for contraceptive services, to estimate the prevalence of contraindications to POPs using diagnosis and procedure codes. RESULTS: Among 813,888 females seeking preventive care between 2009 and 2015, 4.36% had a condition associated with a potential risk or unacceptable risk for initiation of POPs, compared to 2.29% of the 71,216 women seeking both preventive care and contraceptive services. Current breast cancer, the only condition classified as an unacceptable risk for initiation, was listed as a diagnosis for 2.67% and 0.57% in each respective group. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of contraindications to POPs among reproductive age women is low. This finding supports the relative safety of an over the counter progestin-only contraceptive pill. IMPLICATIONS: This analysis provides support for the safety of over the counter access to progestin-only contraceptive pills.

Women's decision making for postpartum sterilization: does the Medicaid waiting period add value?

OBJECTIVES: Currently, patients with federally funded insurance are required to sign a sterilization consent form (SCF) at least 30 days prior to sterilization, while privately insured patients are not. Although this policy was designed to protect the reproductive rights of vulnerable populations, it has had the unintended effect of creating a disparity in access to an effective contraceptive method. Our qualitative study aims to clarify the decision-making process surrounding postpartum sterilization and assess if patients perceive that the SCF adds value. STUDY DESIGN: We interviewed 25 women who underwent postpartum sterilization procedures, 10 with private insurance and 15 with Medicaid. Topics discussed included reproductive history, reason for choosing sterilization, decision-making timeline and value of the SCF. We transcribed and coded the interviews and identified themes. RESULTS: Participant responses indicated that decision-making processes were similar between patients with private insurance and those with Medicaid. For most women, the decision to undergo sterilization took place over the course of their reproductive lives. Participants expressed that nonbiased provider counseling, autonomy and information from other women were helpful to their decision making. Most subjects felt that the SCF might benefit other women but did not/would not affect their own decision making. CONCLUSIONS: We did not find evidence suggesting that women with private insurance and women with Medicaid should be subjected to disparate restrictions on sterilization based on differences in decision-making processes. Characteristics of the decision-making process that women value, which in this population did not include the SCF, should be prioritized. IMPLICATIONS: Given the potential negative consequences associated with the SCF including its disproportionate burden on women of low socioeconomic status, the lack of value added to the decision-making process for postpartum sterilization reported by our participants provides further evidence for reevaluation of the policy.

Contraception and postpartum follow-up in patients with gestational diabetes.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to review the effect of immediate provision of postpartum contraception on postpartum follow-up and screening for type 2 diabetes in women with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). STUDY DESIGN: We performed multivariate logistic regression to identify the association between immediate provision of postpartum contraception and attendance at the 6-week postpartum visit and performance of a 6- to 12-week oral glucose tolerance test, controlling for age, type of insurance, parity and race. RESULTS: Women who received contraception prior to hospital discharge were less likely to attend their postpartum visit [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 0.59, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.39-0.88], but just as likely to participate in postpartum diabetes screening (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.27, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78-2.06). Attendance at the postpartum visit was associated with private insurance (OR 1.93, 95% CI 1.31-2.99). CONCLUSION: Receiving contraception while admitted postpartum did not affect follow-up for diabetes screening for women with GDM.

Cervical Preparation Before Dilation and Evacuation Using Adjunctive Misoprostol or Mifepristone Compared With Overnight Osmotic Dilators Alone: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate operative time after adjunctive misoprostol or mifepristone compared with overnight osmotic dilators alone for cervical preparation before dilation and evacuation at 16-23 6/7 weeks of gestation. METHODS: This double-blind, three-arm, multicenter, randomized trial compared overnight osmotic dilators alone, dilators plus 400 micrograms buccal misoprostol 3 hours preoperatively, and dilators plus 200 mg oral mifepristone during dilator placement for dilation and evacuation. Our primary outcome was dilation and evacuation operative time within two cohorts: 16-18 6/7 weeks of gestation (N=150) and 19-23 6/7 weeks of gestation (N=150). Three hundred women were required for 80% power to detect a 2-minute difference in operative time. Secondary outcomes included initial cervical dilation, side effects, physician satisfaction by Likert scale, and complications. RESULTS: Between February 2013 and February 2014 we randomized 300 women evenly across treatment arms. Group demographics were similar. We found no difference in operative time in either gestational cohort (early cohort [minutes]: 5.11±3.0 dilators alone, 4.99±3.3 misoprostol, 4.33±2.0 mifepristone, P=.34; late cohort [minutes]: 7.50±3.7 dilators alone, 7.62±5.4 misoprostol, 6.74±3.2 mifepristone, P=.53). In the early cohort, initial dilation was greater with misoprostol than dilators alone (2.4 compared with 2.0 cm, P=.007). Patients given misoprostol had significantly more pain, fever, and chills. In the late cohort, dilation and evacuation procedures were less difficult after mifepristone (4.1%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.0-9.6) than misoprostol (18.8%, 95% CI 7.7-29.8) or dilators alone (18.8%, 95% CI 7.7-29.8; P=.04). We had inadequate power to infer differences in complications: dilators alone (10%, 95% CI 4.2-16.0) compared with misoprostol (2%, 95% CI 0-4.7) compared with mifepristone (2%, 95% CI 0-4.8). CONCLUSION: Despite no difference in operative time, adjunctive mifepristone facilitates later dilation and evacuation compared with osmotic dilators alone and is better tolerated than misoprostol. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01751087. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I.

Uterine artery embolization of cervical varices before second-trimester abortion.

BACKGROUND: Cervical varices are an extremely rare complication of pregnancy; they can result in significant maternal morbidity secondary to acute hemorrhage. There is limited evidence to guide the management of cervical varices during termination of pregnancy. CASE: A 37-year-old woman presented with recurrent vaginal hemorrhage at 17 weeks of gestation in the setting of a dichorionic-diamniotic twin gestation, an anterior placenta previa, a subchorionic hematoma visible on ultrasound examination, and prominent cervical varices. After extensive counseling, she and her husband opted for termination. Prophylactic uterine artery embolization was performed before uncomplicated laminaria placement and standard dilation and evacuation. CONCLUSION: Prophylactic uterine artery embolization may have reduced hemorrhage risk from cervical varices during dilation and evacuation for second-trimester abortion.

Contraception in women with epilepsy: pharmacokinetic interactions, contraceptive options, and management.

Contraceptive counseling is a critical component of the management of the female patient with epilepsy because of the increased risk of pregnancy associated with epilepsy and the multitude of interactions between antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) and hormonal contraception. Steroid hormones and many of the AEDs are substrates for the cytochrome P450 enzyme system, in particular, the 3A4 isoenzyme. As a result, concomitant use of hormonal contraceptives and AEDs may pose a risk for unexpected pregnancy, seizures, and drug-related adverse effects. The risk of combined oral contraceptive (COC) failure is slightly increased in the presence of cytochrome P450 3A4 enzyme-inducing AEDs. Several AEDs induce the production of sex hormone binding globulin (SHBG) to which the progestins are tightly bound, resulting in lower concentrations of free progestin that may also lead to COC failure. There is no increase in the risk of COC failure in women taking nonenzyme-inducing AEDs. Oral contraceptives significantly increase the metabolism of lamotrigine, posing a risk of seizures when hormonal agents are initiated and/or toxicity during pill-free weeks. There is no evidence that COCs increase seizures in women with epilepsy. While higher dose COCs are one contraceptive option for women on enzyme-inducing AEDs, a variety of other options are available. Injectable contraception (depot medroxyprogesterone acetate) appears effective with AED use, but the potential for bone mineral density loss is a concern. Intrauterine devices (IUDs) and barrier methods do not rely on hormonal components for contraceptive efficacy, and are therefore appropriate to recommend for use in women using enzyme-inducing medications. This chapter reviews the evidence regarding the pharmacokinetic interaction between AEDs and oral contraceptive hormones, the known or potential interactions with alternative contraceptive methods, and provides practical advice for management of contraceptive needs in reproductive-age women.

Multicenter comparison of the contraceptive ring and patch: a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To understand if the contraceptive ring or patch was more acceptable, as measured primarily by continuation, to women using an oral contraceptive and interested in a nondaily, combined hormonal contraceptive. METHODS: Five hundred women were randomly assigned to use the contraceptive ring (n=249) or contraceptive patch (n=251) for four consecutive menstrual cycles, starting with their next menses. Participants returned for a single follow-up visit during the fourth cycle for an evaluation, which included a questionnaire to assess acceptability and adverse effects. RESULTS: Rates of completion of three cycles were 94.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 91.0-97.1%) and 88.2% (95% CI 83.4-92.0%) for ring and patch users, respectively (P=.03). Of these women, 71.0% (95% CI 64.8-76.6%) and 26.5% (95% CI 21.0-32.6%), respectively, planned to continue their method after the study (P<.001). Women switching to the patch were significantly more likely than women switching to the ring to experience longer periods (38% compared with 9%), increased dysmenorrhea (29% compared with 16%), frequent nausea (8% compared with 1%), frequent mood swings (14% compared with 8%), and frequent skin rash (12% compared with 2%) and were less likely to experience frequent vaginal discharge (8% compared with 17%). Ring users preferred the ring to the oral contraceptive (P<.001), and patch users preferred the oral contraceptive to the patch (P<.001). Nugent scores increased only in patch users (P=.01), although most of these women were asymptomatic. CONCLUSION: Women satisfied with combined oral contraceptives and interested in a nondaily method are more likely to continue using the contraceptive ring than the contraceptive patch. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT00269620. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: I.

Pharmacokinetics, ovulation suppression and return to ovulation following a lower dose subcutaneous formulation of Depo-Provera.

Depo-Provera is a highly effective contraceptive, given intramuscularly (150 mg/mL) once every 3 months. It has been in use in the United States for over 10 years. A new lower-dose formulation of Depo-Provera (104 mg/0.65 mL), has been developed that allows subcutaneous injection, potentially increasing the convenience, ease of administration and tolerability of this contraceptive. This prospective, randomized, single-center, single-dose trial evaluates the pharmacokinetics of the lower-dose formulation of Depo-Provera and compares the lower-dose formulation to the original formulation with regard to efficacy and duration of ovulation suppression and the return to ovulation at 12 months. While delivering a 30% lower total dose than the intramuscular formulation, the lower-dose formulation of Depo-Provera suppressed ovulation for more than 13 weeks in all subjects and was not affected by body mass index or race. Median time for return to ovulation was 30 weeks, with a 97.4% cumulative rate of return to ovulation at 12 months.

A prospective randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial comparing mifepristone and vaginal misoprostol to vaginal misoprostol alone for elective termination of early pregnancy.

BACKGROUND: Vaginal misoprostol has been shown to be an effective single agent for medical abortion. This randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial compared a regimen of mifepristone and misoprostol with misoprostol alone for termination of early pregnancy. METHODS: 250 women with gestations < or = 56 days were randomized by a random number table to receive either 200 mg mifepristone orally or placebo followed 48 h later by 800 microg vaginal misoprostol. Administration of misoprostol was repeated every 24 h up to three doses if abortion failed to occur. Abortion success was defined as complete abortion without the use of surgical aspiration. RESULTS: Successful medical abortions occurred in 114 out of 119 subjects (95.7%) after mifepristone followed by vaginal misoprostol. In all, 110 out of 125 subjects (88.0%) successfully aborted after placebo and vaginal misoprostol. The higher success rate of complete abortion with the mifepristone and misoprostol regimen was statistically significant compared with the placebo and misoprostol regimen (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: A regimen of mifepristone and misoprostol was significantly more effective for termination of pregnancies < or = 56 days than misoprostol alone. The 88% efficacy obtained with vaginal misoprostol alone may be clinically acceptable when mifepristone is not available.