Cargando…

Reducing the harms of unsafe abortion: a systematic review of the safety, effectiveness and acceptability of harm reduction counselling for pregnant persons seeking induced abortion

BACKGROUND: Globally, access to safe abortion is limited. We aimed to assess the safety, effectiveness and acceptability of harm reduction counselling for abortion, which we define as the provision of information about safe abortion methods to pregnant persons seeking abortion. METHODS: We searched...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Stifani, Bianca Maria, Gill, Roopan, Kim, Caron Rahn
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9016246/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35017226
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjsrh-2021-201389
_version_ 1784688489276637184
author Stifani, Bianca Maria
Gill, Roopan
Kim, Caron Rahn
author_facet Stifani, Bianca Maria
Gill, Roopan
Kim, Caron Rahn
author_sort Stifani, Bianca Maria
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Globally, access to safe abortion is limited. We aimed to assess the safety, effectiveness and acceptability of harm reduction counselling for abortion, which we define as the provision of information about safe abortion methods to pregnant persons seeking abortion. METHODS: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials.gov, Cochrane, Global Index Medicus and the grey literature up to October 2021. We included studies in which healthcare providers gave pregnant persons information on safe use of abortifacient medications without providing the actual medications. We conducted a descriptive summary of results and a risk of bias assessment using the ROBINS-I tool. Our primary outcome was the proportion of pregnant persons who used misoprostol to induce abortion rather than other methods among those who received harm reduction counselling. RESULTS: We included four observational studies with a total of 4002 participants. Most pregnant persons who received harm reduction counselling induced abortion using misoprostol (79%–100%). Serious complication rates were low (0%–1%). Uterine aspiration rates were not always reported but were in the range of 6%–22%. Patient satisfaction with the harm reduction intervention was high (85%–98%) where reported. We rated the risk of bias for all studies as high due to a lack of comparison groups and high lost to follow-up rates. DISCUSSION: Based on a synthesis of four studies with serious methodological limitations, most recipients of harm reduction counselling use misoprostol for abortion, have low complication rates, and are satisfied with the intervention. More research is needed to determine abortion success outcomes from the harm reduction approach. FUNDING: This work did not receive any funding. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: We registered the review in the PROSPERO database of systematic reviews (ID number: CRD42020200849).
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9016246
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-90162462022-05-04 Reducing the harms of unsafe abortion: a systematic review of the safety, effectiveness and acceptability of harm reduction counselling for pregnant persons seeking induced abortion Stifani, Bianca Maria Gill, Roopan Kim, Caron Rahn BMJ Sex Reprod Health Review BACKGROUND: Globally, access to safe abortion is limited. We aimed to assess the safety, effectiveness and acceptability of harm reduction counselling for abortion, which we define as the provision of information about safe abortion methods to pregnant persons seeking abortion. METHODS: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials.gov, Cochrane, Global Index Medicus and the grey literature up to October 2021. We included studies in which healthcare providers gave pregnant persons information on safe use of abortifacient medications without providing the actual medications. We conducted a descriptive summary of results and a risk of bias assessment using the ROBINS-I tool. Our primary outcome was the proportion of pregnant persons who used misoprostol to induce abortion rather than other methods among those who received harm reduction counselling. RESULTS: We included four observational studies with a total of 4002 participants. Most pregnant persons who received harm reduction counselling induced abortion using misoprostol (79%–100%). Serious complication rates were low (0%–1%). Uterine aspiration rates were not always reported but were in the range of 6%–22%. Patient satisfaction with the harm reduction intervention was high (85%–98%) where reported. We rated the risk of bias for all studies as high due to a lack of comparison groups and high lost to follow-up rates. DISCUSSION: Based on a synthesis of four studies with serious methodological limitations, most recipients of harm reduction counselling use misoprostol for abortion, have low complication rates, and are satisfied with the intervention. More research is needed to determine abortion success outcomes from the harm reduction approach. FUNDING: This work did not receive any funding. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: We registered the review in the PROSPERO database of systematic reviews (ID number: CRD42020200849). BMJ Publishing Group 2022-04 2022-01-11 /pmc/articles/PMC9016246/ /pubmed/35017226 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjsrh-2021-201389 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Review
Stifani, Bianca Maria
Gill, Roopan
Kim, Caron Rahn
Reducing the harms of unsafe abortion: a systematic review of the safety, effectiveness and acceptability of harm reduction counselling for pregnant persons seeking induced abortion
title Reducing the harms of unsafe abortion: a systematic review of the safety, effectiveness and acceptability of harm reduction counselling for pregnant persons seeking induced abortion
title_full Reducing the harms of unsafe abortion: a systematic review of the safety, effectiveness and acceptability of harm reduction counselling for pregnant persons seeking induced abortion
title_fullStr Reducing the harms of unsafe abortion: a systematic review of the safety, effectiveness and acceptability of harm reduction counselling for pregnant persons seeking induced abortion
title_full_unstemmed Reducing the harms of unsafe abortion: a systematic review of the safety, effectiveness and acceptability of harm reduction counselling for pregnant persons seeking induced abortion
title_short Reducing the harms of unsafe abortion: a systematic review of the safety, effectiveness and acceptability of harm reduction counselling for pregnant persons seeking induced abortion
title_sort reducing the harms of unsafe abortion: a systematic review of the safety, effectiveness and acceptability of harm reduction counselling for pregnant persons seeking induced abortion
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9016246/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35017226
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjsrh-2021-201389
work_keys_str_mv AT stifanibiancamaria reducingtheharmsofunsafeabortionasystematicreviewofthesafetyeffectivenessandacceptabilityofharmreductioncounsellingforpregnantpersonsseekinginducedabortion
AT gillroopan reducingtheharmsofunsafeabortionasystematicreviewofthesafetyeffectivenessandacceptabilityofharmreductioncounsellingforpregnantpersonsseekinginducedabortion
AT kimcaronrahn reducingtheharmsofunsafeabortionasystematicreviewofthesafetyeffectivenessandacceptabilityofharmreductioncounsellingforpregnantpersonsseekinginducedabortion