Cargando…

Effectiveness, safety and acceptability of no‐test medical abortion (termination of pregnancy) provided via telemedicine: a national cohort study

OBJECTIVE: To compare outcomes before and after implementation of medical abortion (termination of pregnancy) without ultrasound via telemedicine. DESIGN: Cohort analysis. SETTING: The three main abortion providers. POPULATION OR SAMPLE: Medical abortions at home at ≤69 days’ gestation in two cohort...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Aiken, ARA, Lohr, PA, Lord, J, Ghosh, N, Starling, J
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8360126/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33605016
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.16668
_version_ 1783737682432622592
author Aiken, ARA
Lohr, PA
Lord, J
Ghosh, N
Starling, J
author_facet Aiken, ARA
Lohr, PA
Lord, J
Ghosh, N
Starling, J
author_sort Aiken, ARA
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To compare outcomes before and after implementation of medical abortion (termination of pregnancy) without ultrasound via telemedicine. DESIGN: Cohort analysis. SETTING: The three main abortion providers. POPULATION OR SAMPLE: Medical abortions at home at ≤69 days’ gestation in two cohorts: traditional model (in‐person with ultrasound, n = 22 158) from January to March 2020 versus telemedicine‐hybrid model (either in person or via telemedicine without ultrasound, n = 29 984, of whom 18 435 had no‐test telemedicine) between April and June 2020. Sample (n = 52 142) comprises 85% of all medical abortions provided nationally. METHODS: Data from electronic records and incident databases were used to compare outcomes between cohorts, adjusted for baseline differences. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Treatment success, serious adverse events, waiting times, gestation at treatment, acceptability. RESULTS: Mean waiting time from referral to treatment was 4.2 days shorter in the telemedicine‐hybrid model and more abortions were provided at ≤6 weeks’ gestation (40% versus 25%, P < 0.001). Treatment success (98.8% versus 98.2%, P > 0.999), serious adverse events (0.02% versus 0.04%, P = 0.557) and incidence of ectopic pregnancy (0.2% versus 0.2%, P = 0.796) were not different between models. In the telemedicine‐hybrid model, 0.04% were estimated to be over 10 weeks’ gestation at the time of the abortion; all were completed safely at home. Within the telemedicine‐hybrid model, effectiveness was higher with telemedicine than in‐person care (99.2% versus 98.1%, P < 0.001). Acceptability of telemedicine was high (96% satisfied) and 80% reported a future preference for telemedicine. CONCLUSIONS: A telemedicine‐hybrid model for medical abortion that includes no‐test telemedicine and treatment without an ultrasound is effective, safe, acceptable and improves access to care. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Compelling evidence from 52 142 women shows no‐test telemedicine abortion is safe, effective and improves care.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8360126
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-83601262021-08-17 Effectiveness, safety and acceptability of no‐test medical abortion (termination of pregnancy) provided via telemedicine: a national cohort study Aiken, ARA Lohr, PA Lord, J Ghosh, N Starling, J BJOG Original Articles OBJECTIVE: To compare outcomes before and after implementation of medical abortion (termination of pregnancy) without ultrasound via telemedicine. DESIGN: Cohort analysis. SETTING: The three main abortion providers. POPULATION OR SAMPLE: Medical abortions at home at ≤69 days’ gestation in two cohorts: traditional model (in‐person with ultrasound, n = 22 158) from January to March 2020 versus telemedicine‐hybrid model (either in person or via telemedicine without ultrasound, n = 29 984, of whom 18 435 had no‐test telemedicine) between April and June 2020. Sample (n = 52 142) comprises 85% of all medical abortions provided nationally. METHODS: Data from electronic records and incident databases were used to compare outcomes between cohorts, adjusted for baseline differences. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Treatment success, serious adverse events, waiting times, gestation at treatment, acceptability. RESULTS: Mean waiting time from referral to treatment was 4.2 days shorter in the telemedicine‐hybrid model and more abortions were provided at ≤6 weeks’ gestation (40% versus 25%, P < 0.001). Treatment success (98.8% versus 98.2%, P > 0.999), serious adverse events (0.02% versus 0.04%, P = 0.557) and incidence of ectopic pregnancy (0.2% versus 0.2%, P = 0.796) were not different between models. In the telemedicine‐hybrid model, 0.04% were estimated to be over 10 weeks’ gestation at the time of the abortion; all were completed safely at home. Within the telemedicine‐hybrid model, effectiveness was higher with telemedicine than in‐person care (99.2% versus 98.1%, P < 0.001). Acceptability of telemedicine was high (96% satisfied) and 80% reported a future preference for telemedicine. CONCLUSIONS: A telemedicine‐hybrid model for medical abortion that includes no‐test telemedicine and treatment without an ultrasound is effective, safe, acceptable and improves access to care. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Compelling evidence from 52 142 women shows no‐test telemedicine abortion is safe, effective and improves care. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021-03-24 2021-08 /pmc/articles/PMC8360126/ /pubmed/33605016 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.16668 Text en © 2021 The Authors. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Aiken, ARA
Lohr, PA
Lord, J
Ghosh, N
Starling, J
Effectiveness, safety and acceptability of no‐test medical abortion (termination of pregnancy) provided via telemedicine: a national cohort study
title Effectiveness, safety and acceptability of no‐test medical abortion (termination of pregnancy) provided via telemedicine: a national cohort study
title_full Effectiveness, safety and acceptability of no‐test medical abortion (termination of pregnancy) provided via telemedicine: a national cohort study
title_fullStr Effectiveness, safety and acceptability of no‐test medical abortion (termination of pregnancy) provided via telemedicine: a national cohort study
title_full_unstemmed Effectiveness, safety and acceptability of no‐test medical abortion (termination of pregnancy) provided via telemedicine: a national cohort study
title_short Effectiveness, safety and acceptability of no‐test medical abortion (termination of pregnancy) provided via telemedicine: a national cohort study
title_sort effectiveness, safety and acceptability of no‐test medical abortion (termination of pregnancy) provided via telemedicine: a national cohort study
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8360126/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33605016
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.16668
work_keys_str_mv AT aikenara effectivenesssafetyandacceptabilityofnotestmedicalabortionterminationofpregnancyprovidedviatelemedicineanationalcohortstudy
AT lohrpa effectivenesssafetyandacceptabilityofnotestmedicalabortionterminationofpregnancyprovidedviatelemedicineanationalcohortstudy
AT lordj effectivenesssafetyandacceptabilityofnotestmedicalabortionterminationofpregnancyprovidedviatelemedicineanationalcohortstudy
AT ghoshn effectivenesssafetyandacceptabilityofnotestmedicalabortionterminationofpregnancyprovidedviatelemedicineanationalcohortstudy
AT starlingj effectivenesssafetyandacceptabilityofnotestmedicalabortionterminationofpregnancyprovidedviatelemedicineanationalcohortstudy