Latest News

Does the U.S. have enough abortion providers?


 

Pivot to telehealth?

Another study, published in the same issue of JAMA Internal Medicine, evaluated health outcomes for 3,779 women. That study found that eligibility screening for medical abortions by history alone, without pelvic examination or ultrasonography, was safe and effective. That study found that medications were either dispensed in person or through the mail.

Taken together, the two studies suggest that more abortion services may shift toward telehealth, which could expand the number of health care professionals performing such services. Providers could include nurse practitioners, midwives, and physician assistants, said Melissa Grant, chief operating officer of carafem, a reproductive health and abortion service provider.

The service, which has offices in Atlanta, Chicago, Nashville, and Washington, D.C., has found that many patients prefer online appointments, especially if they live in rural areas, Ms. Grant said. The pandemic created a push toward online services.

“Even before the current breadth of restrictive legislation, we were seeing in increase because of COVID,” she said. “Most likely, abortion providers will continue to be pushed out of the profession, so having an option that’s widely available no matter where you live is essential. The United States is moving toward a system where the ZIP code you live in will foretell what care you get. That’s chilling.”

Those who currently provide abortion care have two advantages over what was available previously, Ms. Grant said. First, medical abortion is much more common, and data show that it is safe and effective for most pregnant people, as long as they undergo a health screening. Second, the boom in telehealth during the pandemic means providers are much more experienced in this type of service than before.

As more services such as carafem crop up, costs will drop, since a telehealth clinic – even one that uses health care professionals – has fewer expenses, such as for rent and equipment, than a physical facility.

“Because of the stigma around abortion, this is not likely to prompt a big rush of start-ups, but I do think we’re going to see a shake-up in the way services are being offered, and both patients and providers will likely turn toward technology,” Ms. Grant said. “An environment like this will require flexibility, innovation, and some real grit. We may take some time to get there, but it’s possible this moment is a pivot point in how abortion care is provided.”

Some of the researchers received grants from the Susan T. Buffett Foundation.

A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.

Pages

Recommended Reading

More than half of U.S. women enter pregnancy at higher CVD risk
MDedge ObGyn
Epidural may lower odds of severe maternal birth complications
MDedge ObGyn
Past spontaneous abortion raises risk for gestational diabetes
MDedge ObGyn
‘Baby-friendly’ steps help women meet prenatal breastfeeding goals
MDedge ObGyn
DMTs tied to lower MS relapse during reproductive therapy
MDedge ObGyn
Is the United States addressing maternal mortality rates from preeclampsia/eclampsia and chronic hypertension?
MDedge ObGyn
Nonstress test and maximal vertical pocket vs the biophysical profile: Equivocal or equivalent?
MDedge ObGyn
Antiretroviral therapy associated with less risk of preterm birth
MDedge ObGyn
Maternal obesity promotes risk of perinatal death
MDedge ObGyn
Family Physician: Abortion care is health and primary care
MDedge ObGyn