How can patient experience of abortion care be improved? Evidence from the SACHA study.

BACKGROUND: Models of abortion care have changed significantly in the last decade, most markedly during the COVID-19 pandemic, when home management of early medical abortion with telemedical support was approved in Britain. OBJECTIVE: Our study aimed to examine women's satisfaction with abortion care and their suggestions for improvements. DESIGN: Qualitative, in-depth, semi-structured interviews. METHODS: A purposive sample of 48 women with recent experience of abortion was recruited between July 2021 and August 2022 from independent sector and National Health Service abortion services in Scotland, Wales and England. Interviews were conducted by phone or via video call. Women were asked about their abortion experience and for suggestions for any improvements that could be made along their patient journey - from help-seeking, the initial consultation, referral, treatment, to aftercare. Data were analyzed using the Framework Method. RESULTS: Participants were aged 16-43 years; 39 had had a medical abortion, 8 a surgical abortion, and 1 both. The majority were satisfied with their clinical care. The supportive, kind and non-judgmental attitudes of abortion providers were highly valued, as was the convenience afforded by remotely supported home management of medical abortion. Suggestions for improvement across the patient journey centred around the need for timely care; greater correspondence between expectations and reality; the importance of choice; and the need for greater personal and emotional support. CONCLUSION: Recent changes in models of care present both opportunities and challenges for quality of care. The perspectives of patients highlight further opportunities for improving care and support. The principles of timely care, choice, management of expectations, and emotional support should inform further service configuration.

How can patients' experience of abortion care in Britain be improved?Provision of abortion care and support in Britain has changed in recent decades. The COVID-19 pandemic also brought called for new ways of managing early medical abortions, at home, with remote support. We wanted to know how women in Britain felt about this kind of abortion care, and what ideas they had to make it better. Between July 2021 and August 2022, we spoke with 48 women who had recently had an abortion in Scotland, Wales and England. Some received got care from independent clinics, and some from the National Health Service (NHS). We talked to them over the phone or through video calls. We asked about their experiences, and what could be done to improve different parts of their care journey ­ from looking fo asking for help, the first appointment, the treatment, to the follow-up care. Most women generally felt satisfied with how they were taken care of by the medical staff. They appreciated the supportive, kind and non-judgmental attitude of the health professionals providing abortion care. They also liked the convenience of telemedicine and remote care, which made it easier to have a medical abortion at home. The changes in provision of abortion care and support have mostly had positive effects on women's experience. Yet the feedback from women interviewed shows that there are still more opportunities to make improvements, focusing on prompt care, offering choices of abortion method and location, managing expectations better, and providing more emotional support. These principles should guide how services are set up in the future.

Patient experiences of undergoing abortion with and without an ultrasound scan in Britain.

BACKGROUND: Routine ultrasound scanning to determine gestational age and pregnancy location has long been part of pre-abortion assessment in Britain, despite not being legally required or recommended in national clinical guidelines. To support implementation of fully telemedical abortion care (implemented in Britain in April 2020), the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG) issued clinical guidance for an 'as-indicated' approach to pre-abortion ultrasound, removing the need for a clinic visit. We aimed to understand patient experiences of ultrasound in abortion care by conducting a qualitative study with individuals who had abortions with and without an ultrasound scan. METHODS: Between November 2021 and July 2022, we recruited patients who had a medical abortion at home without a pre-procedure ultrasound at 69 days' gestation or less at British Pregnancy Advisory Service (BPAS), and also had at least one other abortion with an ultrasound from any provider in Britain. We conducted interviews using a semi-structured interview guide to explore our participants' experiences and conducted reflexive thematic analysis. RESULTS: We recruited 24 participants and included 19 interviews in our analysis. We developed three themes from our data. These were 'Ultrasound scans and their relationship with autonomy and decision-making', 'Intrusive and out of place: the ultrasound as an inappropriate technology' and 'Towards preference-centred, quality care'. CONCLUSIONS: Further research and user-testing of strategies to improve the scan experience should be undertaken. Patient testimonies on the negative impact of ultrasound scans in abortion care should reassure providers that omitting them according to patient preference is a positive step towards providing patient-centred care.

Patient and public involvement in abortion research: reflections from the Shaping Abortion for Change (SACHA) Study.

Patient and public involvement (PPI) is limited within abortion-related research. Possible reasons for this include concerns about engaging with a stigmatised patient group who value confidentiality and may be reluctant to re-engage with services. Structural barriers, including limited funding for abortion-related research, also prevent researchers from creating meaningful PPI opportunities. Here, we describe lessons learnt on undertaking PPI as part of the Shaping Abortion for Change (SACHA) Study, which sought to create an evidence base to guide new directions in abortion care in Britain.Two approaches to PPI were used: involving patients and the public in the oversight of the research and its dissemination as lay advisors, and group meetings to obtain patients' views on interpretation of findings and recommendations. All participants observed the SACHA findings aligned with their own experiences of having an abortion in Britain. These priorities aligned closely with those identified in a separate expert stakeholder consultation undertaken as part of the SACHA Study. One additional priority which had not been identified during the research was identified by the PPI participants.We found abortion patients to be highly motivated to engage in the group meetings, and participation in them actively contributed to the destigmatisation of abortion by giving them a space to share their experiences. This may alleviate any ethical concerns about conducting research and PPI on abortion, including the assumption that revisiting an abortion experience will cause distress. We hope that our reflections are useful to others considering PPI in abortion-related research and service improvement.

Opt-in versus universal codeine provision for medical abortion up to 10 weeks of gestation at British Pregnancy Advisory Service: a cross-sectional evaluation.

OBJECTIVE: To assess patient experiences of pain management during medical abortion up to 10 weeks' gestation with opt-in versus universal codeine provision. METHODS: We invited patients who underwent medical abortion up to 10 weeks of gestation to participate in an online, anonymous, English-language survey from November 2021 to March 2022. We performed ordinal regression analyses to compare satisfaction with pain management (5-point Likert scale) and maximum abortion pain score (11-point numerical rating scale) in the opt-in versus universal codeine provision groups. RESULTS: Of 11 906 patients invited to participate, 1625 (13.6%) completed the survey. Participants reported a mean maximum pain score of 6.8±2.2. A total of 1149 participants (70.7%) reported using codeine for pain management during their abortion. Participants in the opt-in codeine provision group were significantly more likely to be satisfied with their pain management than those in the universal group (aOR 1.48, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.96, p<0.01). Maximum abortion pain scores were lower on average among the opt-in codeine provision group (OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.96, p=0.02); however, this association was not statistically significant in the model adjusted for covariates (aOR 0.85, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.03, p=0.09). CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that patients have a better experience with pain management during medical abortion when able to opt-in to codeine provision following counselling versus receiving this medication routinely.

Impact of approval of home use of misoprostol in England on access to medical abortion: An interrupted time series analysis.

OBJECTIVE: In 2018, the Department of Health and Social Care in England approved the use of misoprostol at home for early medical abortions, following administration of mifepristone at clinic. The objective of the present study was to assess the impact of the approval of home administration of misoprostol in England on access to medical abortion, assessed through proxy measures of the proportion of all abortions that were medical and gestational age. METHODS: This study uses the clinical data from the British Pregnancy Advisory Service on abortions in England in years 2018-2019, containing demographic and procedure characteristics of patients. We conducted an interrupted time series analysis to establish the differences before and after the approval in access to medical abortion, measured by the proportion of all abortions that were medical, and gestational age. The analysis also examined whether these changes were equitable, with focus on area-level deprivation. RESULTS: The analysis of the data (145 529 abortions) suggested that there was an increase in the proportion of medical abortions and decrease in gestational age of abortions after the approval. Compared with the situation if former trends had continued, the actual proportion of early medical abortions was 4.2% higher in December 2019, and the mean gestational age 3.4 days lower. We found that the acceleration of existing trends in increase in proportion of medical abortions and decrease in gestational age were larger in the most deprived quintiles and in those reporting a disability, but not equal across ethnic groups, with Black and Black British women experiencing little change in trajectories post-approval. CONCLUSION: The approval of home use of misoprostol as part of an early medical abortion regimen in England was associated with material and equitable improvements in abortion access. Pre-approval trends toward greater uptake of medical abortion and declining gestational age were accelerated post-approval and were greatest in the most deprived areas of England, but not across all racial/ethnic groups. The present findings strongly support the continuation or introduction of home management of medical abortions.

Urinary Risk Profile, Impact of Diet, and Risk of Calcium Oxalate Urolithiasis in Idiopathic Uric Acid Stone Disease.

The role of diet in the pathogenesis of uric acid (UA) nephrolithiasis is incompletely understood. This study investigated the effect of dietary intervention on the risk of UA stone formation under standardized conditions. Twenty patients with idiopathic UA stone disease were included in the study. Dietary intake and 24 h urinary parameters were collected on the usual diet of the patients and a standardized balanced mixed diet. Although urinary UA excretion did not change, the relative supersaturation of UA decreased significantly by 47% under the balanced diet primarily due to the significant increase in urine volume and pH. Urinary pH was below 5.8 in 85% of patients under the usual diet, and in 60% of patients under the balanced diet. The supersaturation of calcium oxalate declined significantly under the balanced diet due to the significant decrease in urinary calcium and oxalate excretion and the increase in urine volume. Dietary intervention is a key component in the management of UA nephrolithiasis. Urinary calcium and oxalate excretion should also be monitored in patients with pure UA calculi to reduce the risk of mixed stone formation with calcium oxalate. Lower urinary pH in UA stone patients can only be partially explained by diet.

Should COVID-specific arrangements for abortion continue? The views of women experiencing abortion in Britain during the pandemic.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, the British governments issued temporary approvals enabling the use of both medical abortion pills, mifepristone and misoprostol, at home. This permitted the introduction of a fully telemedical model of abortion care with consultations taking place via telephone or video call and medications delivered to women's homes. The decision was taken by the governments in England and Wales to continue this model of care beyond the original end date of April 2022, while at time of writing the approval in Scotland remains under consultation. METHODS: We interviewed 30 women who had undergone an abortion in England, Scotland or Wales between August and December 2021. We explored their views on the changes in abortion service configuration during the pandemic and whether abortion via telemedicine and use of abortion medications at home should continue. RESULTS: Support for continuation of the permission to use mifepristone and misoprostol at home was overwhelmingly positive. Reasons cited included convenience, comfort, reduced stigma, privacy and respect for autonomy. A telemedical model was also highly regarded for similar reasons, but for some its necessity was linked to safety measures during the pandemic, and an option to have an in-person interaction with a health professional at some point in the care pathway was endorsed. CONCLUSIONS: The approval to use abortion pills at home via telemedicine is supported by women having abortions in Britain. The voices of patients are essential to shaping acceptable and appropriate abortion service provision.

Abortion education in UK medical schools: a survey of medical educators.

AIM: The 2019 National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidance on abortion care emphasised the importance of teaching the topic at undergraduate and postgraduate level. This study aimed to investigate the current provision of undergraduate abortion education in UK medical schools. METHODS: Relevant medical ethics and clinical leads from the 33 established UK medical schools were invited to complete surveys on the ethico-legal or clinical aspects, respectively, of their institution's abortion teaching. The surveys explored how abortion is currently taught, assessed the respondent's opinion on current barriers to comprehensive teaching, and their desire for further guidance on undergraduate abortion teaching. RESULTS: Some 76% (25/33) of medical schools responded to one or both surveys. The number of hours spent on ethico-legal teaching ranged from under 1 hour to over 8 hours, with most clinical teaching lasting under 2 hours. Barriers to teaching were reported by 68% (21/31) of respondents, the most common being difficulty accessing clinical placements, lack of curriculum time, and the perception of abortion as a sensitive topic. Some 74% (23/31) of respondents would welcome additional guidance on teaching abortion to medical undergraduates. CONCLUSIONS: Education on abortion, particularly clinical education, varies widely among UK medical schools. Most educators experience barriers to providing comprehensive abortion teaching and would welcome up-to-date guidance on teaching both the clinical and ethico-legal aspects of abortion to medical students. It is essential that medical schools address the barriers to teaching, to ensure all medical students have the knowledge, skills and attitudes to provide competent and respectful abortion-related care once qualified.

Efficacy of a low-sensitivity urine pregnancy test for identifying ongoing pregnancy after medication abortion at 64 to 70 days of gestation.

OBJECTIVES: We assessed whether a low-sensitivity pregnancy test is effective at identifying ongoing pregnancy after medication abortion at 64 to 70 days of gestation. STUDY DESIGN: From October 2018 to March 2020, we performed a prospective observational study of participants in England and Wales undergoing medication abortion. Participants were scheduled to return to the clinic 14 ± 3 days after mifepristone administration to perform a low-sensitivity pregnancy test (human chorionic gonadotropin threshold of 1000 mIU/mL) and symptom checklist, and state whether they thought the abortion was complete. Clinicians also assessed the low-sensitivity pregnancy test and performed an ultrasound to determine abortion status. We calculated the sensitivity, specificity, negative and positive predictive value of the low-sensitivity pregnancy test (with and without a symptom checklist) for detecting ongoing pregnancy. RESULTS: We enrolled 757 participants. Thirty-one did not progress to abortion and 558 (76.9%) completed follow-up. Most (79.6%) attended per-protocol; 22 (3.9%) attended earlier than 11 days and 92 (16.5%) later than 17 days. Thirteen participants (2.3%) had an ongoing pregnancy. The low-sensitivity pregnancy test correctly identified all the ongoing pregnancies (sensitivity = 100%; specificity = 84.8%; negative predictive value = 100%; positive predictive value = 13.5%). The symptom checklist alone had a sensitivity of 76.9% and a negative predictive value of 99.4% for identifying ongoing pregnancies. Participants and clinicians agreed on the interpretation of the low-sensitivity pregnancy test 94.6% of the time. CONCLUSIONS: Patient self-assessment of a low-sensitivity pregnancy test after medication abortion between 64- and 70 days' gestation has high sensitivity and negative predictive value for identification of ongoing pregnancy. IMPLICATIONS: Patients can be offered a low-sensitivity pregnancy test to assess for ongoing pregnancy after medication abortion up to 70 days of gestation thereby reducing the need for in-person visits. Services should be prepared to provide in-person assessments after positive or inconclusive results to ensure early identification of abortion complications.

Client perspectives on choice of abortion method in England and Wales.

INTRODUCTION: The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists and the World Health Organization recommend that services provide a choice between medical and surgical methods of abortion. We analysed qualitative study data to examine patient perspectives on abortion method choice and barriers to meeting them. METHODS: In-depth interviews with 24 clients who had an abortion at British Pregnancy Advisory Service clinics were carried out between December 2018 and July 2019 to examine perspectives of quality of abortion care. In this article we focus on client perspectives on choice of abortion method. We performed thematic analysis of data relating to choice of abortion method, refined the analysis, interpreted the findings, and organised the data into themes. RESULTS: Participants' preferences for abortion method were shaped by prior experience of abortion, accessibility and privacy, perceptions of risk and experiences of abortion method, and information gathering and counselling. Participants' ability to obtain their preferred method was impacted by intersecting constraints such as appointment availability, service location and gestational age. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings show that many factors shape participants' preferences for abortion method. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, some abortion services have constrained abortion method choices, with an emphasis on medical abortion and 'no-touch' care. Providers in the UK and beyond should aim to restore and expand more treatment options when the situation allows.

It's a small bit of advice, but actually on the day, made such a difference : perceptions of quality in abortion care in England and Wales.

BACKGROUND: Quality of care (QOC) is increasingly identified as an important contributor to healthcare outcomes, however little agreement exists on what constitutes quality in abortion care or the recommended indicators from the service-user perspective. Our study aimed to explore perceptions and experiences of abortion QOC in England and Wales. METHODS: We performed in-depth interviews (via phone or in-person) with participants who had an abortion at a nationwide independent sector provider in the previous 6 months. We explored their experiences of the abortion service at each point in the care pathway, their perspectives on what contributed to and detracted from the experience meeting their definitions of quality, and their reflections on different aspects of QOC. We used content analysis to generate themes. RESULTS: From December 2018 to July 2019, we conducted 24 interviews. Ten participants had a surgical and 14 had a medical abortion. Seventeen (71%) were treated in the first 12 weeks of pregnancy and 7 (29%) beyond that, with an average gestational age of 10 weeks + 5 days (range 5-23 + 6). We identified 4 major themes that contributed to participant's perception of high quality care: (1) interpersonal interactions with staff or other patients, (2) being informed and prepared, (3) participation and choices in care and (4) accessibility. Nearly all participants identified interpersonal interactions with staff as an important contributor to quality with positive interactions often cited as the best part of their abortion experience and negative interactions as the worst. For information and preparation, participant described not only the importance of being well prepared, but how incongruencies between information and the actual experience detracted from quality. Participants said that making choices about their care, for example, method of abortion, was a positive contributor. Finally, participants identified access to care, specifically in relation to waiting times and travel, as an important aspect of QOC. CONCLUSIONS: Participants situated quality in abortion care in 4 domains: interpersonal aspects of care, information and preparation, choices, and accessibility. Indicators identified can be used to develop standard metrics to ensure care meets service-user needs.

Quality of care is an important aspect of delivering healthcare in a patient-centred manner. There is a lack of agreement about what consititutes quality care for an abortion service. In our study, we interviewed 24 participants who had an abortion in the last 6 months to assess their perceptions of quality of care. Based on our analysis, we identified 4 themes that were important contributors to quality: (1) interactions with clinic staff or other patients, (2) information and preparation for the abortion, (3) making choices about care, and (4) access to abortion care. Almost all of our study participants said that positive interactions with clinic staff contributed to a quality experience. Participants wanted to be well-prepared for their abortion. They reported a negative experience when the information they were given did not match their experience. Participants felt that active participation in choices around their abortion experience improved quality. Finally, ease of access to abortion care made for a more positive experience. Abortion providers and researchers should consider using the results of our study to ensure their services meet patients' needs.

Client satisfaction and experience of telemedicine and home use of mifepristone and misoprostol for abortion up to 10 weeks' gestation at British Pregnancy Advisory Service: A cross-sectional evaluation.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate satisfaction and experience with telemedicine consultation and home use of mifepristone and misoprostol for abortion to 10 weeks' gestation. STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional evaluation of British Pregnancy Advisory Service (BPAS) clients who used mifepristone and misoprostol at home from 11 May to 10 July 2020. We sent a text message with a link to a web-survey 2 to 3 weeks postabortion. Questions assessed satisfaction and experiences with a service model including telephone consultation and provision of medicines by mail or collection from the clinic. We used bivariate and multivariate regression to explore associations between client characteristics and outcomes. Our primary outcomes were overall satisfaction (5-point Likert scale) and reported contact with a health care provider. RESULTS: A total of 1,333 clients participated. Respondents described home use of medications as "straightforward" (75.8%) and most were "very satisfied" (78.3%) or "satisfied" (18.6%) overall. Being "very satisfied" was associated with parity (aOR 1.53, 95% CI 1.09-2.14) and pain control satisfaction (aOR 2.22, 95% CI 1.44-3.44). Health care provider contact was reported by 14.7%; mainly to BPAS' telephone aftercare service (76.8%). Dissatisfaction with pain control (aOR 3.62, 95% CI 1.79-7.29) and waiting >1 week to use mifepristone (aOR3.71, 95% CI 1.48-9.28) were associated with health care provider contact. If needed in the future, most would prefer consultation by phone (74.3%) and home use of mifepristone and misoprostol (77.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Satisfaction with telemedicine and home use of mifepristone and misoprostol is high. Most clients do not need health care provider support when administering medicines at home or post abortion.

Cervical priming before surgical abortion between 14 and 24 weeks: a systematic review and meta-analyses for the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence-new clinical guidelines for England.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine the optimal cervical priming regimen before surgical abortion between 14+0 and 24+0 weeks' gestation. DATA SOURCES: Embase, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Library were searched for publications up to February 2020. Experts were consulted for any ongoing or missed trials. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials, published in English after 1985, that compared (1) mifepristone, misoprostol, and osmotic dilators against each other, alone or in combination; (2) different doses of mifepristone and misoprostol; (3) different intervals between priming and abortion; or (4) different routes of administration of misoprostol were included. METHODS: Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration checklist for randomized controlled trials, and data were meta-analyzed in Review Manager 5.3. Dichotomous outcomes were analyzed as risk ratios using the Mantel-Haenszel method, and continuous outcomes were analyzed as mean differences using the inverse variance method. Fixed effects models were used when there was no significant heterogeneity (I2<50%), random effects models were used for moderate heterogeneity (I2≤50% and <80%), and evidence was not pooled when there was high heterogeneity (I2≥80%). Subgroup analyses were undertaken based on parity where available. The overall quality of the evidence was assessed using Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development, and Evaluation. RESULTS: A total of 15 randomized controlled trials (N=2454) were included and showed decreased difficulty of procedure and/or increased cervical dilation and decreased patient acceptability with regimens that included dilators compared with those that did not include dilators; increased preoperative expulsion of the pregnancy with sublingual misoprostol and mifepristone compared with sublingual misoprostol alone; increased difficulty of procedure with dilators and misoprostol compared with dilators and mifepristone; decreased difficulty of procedure with dilators and mifepristone compared with dilators alone; and increased cervical dilation when dilators were placed the day before abortion compared with the same day. CONCLUSION: Considered alongside clinical expertise, the published data support the use of osmotic dilators, misoprostol, or mifepristone before abortion for pregnancies at 14+0 to 16+0 weeks' gestation; osmotic dilators or misoprostol for pregnancies at 16+1 to 19+0 weeks' gestation; and osmotic dilators alone or with mifepristone for pregnancies at 19+1 to 24+0 weeks' gestation. The effectiveness of pharmacologic agents alone beyond 16+0 weeks' gestation and the optimal timing of dilator placement remain important questions for future research.

What should medical students be taught about abortion? An evaluation of student attitudes towards their abortion teaching and their future involvement in abortion care.

BACKGROUND: One in three women in the United Kingdom (UK) will have an abortion before age 45, making abortion provision an essential aspect of reproductive healthcare. Despite this, abortion remains ethically contested and stigmatised, with variable teaching in UK medical schools and concerns about falling numbers of doctors willing to participate in abortion care. University College London Medical School (UCLMS) has designed practical, inclusive, teaching that aims to give students an understanding of the importance of abortion care and prepare them to be competent practitioners in this area. This study aimed to determine students' opinions of this teaching and their wider attitudes towards abortion. METHODS: We invited all 357 final-year UCL medical students to complete an online survey consisting of closed-ended questions, exploring their opinions on their abortion teaching, their personal beliefs about abortion and their future willingness to be involved in abortion care. We analysed responses using non-parametric tests. RESULTS: One hundred and forty-six questionnaires (41% response rate) showed 83% of students identified as pro-choice (agree with the right to choose an abortion). Fifty-seven percent felt they received the right amount of abortion teaching, 39% would have liked more and 4% stated they received too much. There was no correlation between students' attitudes to abortion and the rating of teaching; both pro-choice and pro-life (opposed to the right to choose an abortion) students generally rated the teaching as important and valued the range of methods used. Students requested more simulated practice speaking to patients requesting an abortion. Students with pro-life beliefs expressed lower willingness to discuss, refer, certify and provide future abortions. Students interested in careers in specialties where they may encounter abortion were more likely to be pro-choice than pro-life. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of participating UCL medical students were pro-choice and willing to be involved in future abortion care. Efforts to make teaching on abortion practical, engaging, sensitive and inclusive were appreciated. As well as preparing students to be competent and caring practitioners, the teaching appears to contribute towards them viewing abortion as an essential aspect of women's healthcare, and may contribute to destigmatising abortion.

Expulsion at home for early medical abortion: A systematic review with meta-analyses.

INTRODUCTION: The safety and acceptability of medical abortion using mifepristone and misoprostol at home at ≤9+0  weeks' gestation is well established. However, the upper gestational limit at which the procedure remains safe and acceptable at home is not known. To inform a national guideline on abortion care we conducted a systematic review to determine what gestational limit for expulsion at home offers the best balance of benefits and harms for women who are having medical abortion. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We searched Embase, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Cinahl Plus and Web-of-Science on 2 January 2020 for prospective and retrospective cohort studies with ≥50 women per gestational age group, published in English from 1995 onwards, that included women undergoing medical abortion and compared home expulsion of pregnancies of ≤9+0  weeks' gestational age with pregnancies of 9+1 -10+0  weeks or >10+1  weeks' gestational age, or compared the latter two gestational age groups. We assessed risk-of-bias using the Newcastle-Ottowa scale. All outcomes were meta-analyzed as risk ratios (RR) using the Mantel-Haenszel method. The certainty of the evidence was assessed using GRADE. RESULTS: Six studies (n = 3381) were included. The "need for emergency care/admission to hospital" (RR = 0.79, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.45-1.4), "hemorrhage requiring transfusion/≥500 mL blood loss" (RR = 0.62, 95% CI 0.11-3.55), patient satisfaction (RR = 0.99, 95% CI 0.95-1.03), pain (RR = 0.91, 95% CI 0.82-1.02), and "complete abortion without the need for surgical intervention" (RR = 1.03, 95% CI 1-1.05) did not differ statistically significantly between the ≤9+0 and >9+0  weeks' gestation groups. The rates of vomiting (RR = 0.8, 95% CI 0.69-0.93) and diarrhea (RR = 0.85, 95% CI 0.73-0.99) were statistically significantly lower in the ≤9+0  weeks group but these differences were not considered clinically important. We found no studies comparing pregnancies of 9+1 -10+0  weeks' gestation with pregnancies of >10+0  weeks' gestation. The certainty of this evidence was predominantly low and mainly compromised by low event rates and loss to follow up. CONCLUSIONS: Women who are having a medical abortion and will be taking mifepristone up to and including 10+0  weeks' gestation should be offered the option of expulsion at home after they have taken the misoprostol. Further research needs to determine whether the gestational limit for home expulsion can be extended beyond 10+0  weeks.

Surgical or medical abortion of pregnancies between 13+0 and 23+6 weeks' gestation? A systematic review and new NICE national guidelines.

BACKGROUND: Abortion in the second trimester may be performed surgically or medically. The objective of this systematic review was to examine the effectiveness, safety and acceptability/satisfaction of surgical compared with medical abortion of pregnancy between 13+0 and 23+6 weeks' gestation for a new national guideline. METHODS: We searched Embase, Medline and the Cochrane Library on 4 March 2019. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs; any size) and non-randomised comparative studies with n≥100 in each arm, published in English from 1985. Risk-of-bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration checklist for RCTs. Meta-analysis of risk ratios (RRs)used the Mantel-Haenszel method. The quality of the evidence was assessed using GRADE. RESULTS: Two RCTs (n=140) were included. 'Incomplete abortion requiring surgical intervention' was clinically significantly higher with medical than surgical methods (RR=4.58, 95% CI 1.07 to 19.64). 'Abortion completed by the intended method' was statistically, but not clinically, significantly lower after medical than surgical methods, but was marked by high between-study heterogeneity (RR=0.88, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.98). To the extent that 'haemorrhage requiring transfusion/≥500 mL blood loss', 'uterine injury', 'cervical injury requiring repair' and 'infection reported within 1 month of abortion' were reported, they did not differ significantly between methods. Depending on measurement method, 'patient satisfaction/acceptability' was either clinically significantly higher or comparable after surgical than medical methods. The quality of this evidence was limited by low event rates and attrition bias. CONCLUSION: Based on this evidence and consensus, women should be offered the choice of medical or surgical methods of abortion between 13+0 and 23+6 weeks' gestation, unless not clinically appropriate.