Effect of mifepristone on abortion access in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the pattern of mifepristone uptake in the United States and whether the introduction of this drug has facilitated access to abortion services. METHODS: Using data from a national census of abortion providers and from the U.S. distributor of mifepristone, we assessed the number and proportion of abortions performed using mifepristone, the distribution of mifepristone providers by provider type and medical specialty, and the geographic distribution of mifepristone and surgical providers. RESULTS: The number of mifepristone providers increased from 208 in the last 2 months of 2000 to 700 in 2001, the first full year of availability, and to 902 in 2007. Some 158,000 mifepristone abortions were performed in 2007, representing an estimated 14% of all abortions and 21% of eligible early abortions. Physicians represented 51% of mifepristone providers but accounted for just 11% of abortions; most were obstetrician-gynecologists. The proportion of abortions in each state performed using mifepristone ranged from 0% to 80%. Most mifepristone abortions were performed at or near facilities that also provided surgical abortion. Only five mifepristone-only providers of 10 or more abortions were located farther than 50 miles from any surgical provider of 400 or more abortions. CONCLUSION: Mifepristone has become an integral part of abortion provision in the United States and likely has contributed to a trend toward very early abortions. However, expectations that approval of mifepristone would result in a wider range of providers offering abortion have not yet been met, and mifepristone has not brought a major improvement in the geographic availability of abortion. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Public and private providers' involvement in improving their patients' contraceptive use.

BACKGROUND: This study measured differences in the provision of care between public and private providers of contraceptive services, what problems using contraception these providers perceived their patients to have and providers' views on how to improve their patients' method use. STUDY DESIGN: A nationally representative mixed-mode survey (mail, Internet and fax) of private family practice and obstetrician/gynecologist physicians who provided contraceptive care in 2005 was conducted. A parallel survey was administered to public contraceptive care providers in community health centers, hospitals, Planned Parenthood clinics and other sites during the same period. Descriptive and multivariate analyses were conducted across both surveys. RESULTS: A total of 1256 questionnaires were completed for a response rate of 62%. A majority of providers surveyed believed that over 10% of their contraceptive clients experienced ambivalence about avoiding pregnancy, underestimated the risk of pregnancy and failed to use contraception for one or more months when at risk for unintended pregnancy. Implementation of protocols to promote contraceptive use ranged widely among provider types: a full 78% of Panned Parenthood clinics offered quick-start pill initiation, as did 47% of public health departments. However, 38% of obstetrician-gynecologists, 27% of "other public" clinics and only 13% of family physicians did so. Both public and private providers reported that one of the most important things they could do to improve patients' contraceptive method use was to provide more and better counseling. At least 46% of private providers and at least 21% of public providers reported that changing insurance reimbursement to allow more time for counseling was very important. CONCLUSIONS: Strategies to improve contraceptive use for all persons in need in the United States have the potential to be more effective if the challenges contraceptive providers face and the differences between public and private providers are taken into account.