Comparison of No-Test Telehealth and In-Person Medication Abortion

Author:

Ralph Lauren J.1,Baba C. Finley1,Biggs M. Antonia1,McNicholas Colleen2,Hagstrom Miller Amy3,Grossman Daniel1

Affiliation:

1. Advancing New Standards in Reproductive Health (ANSIRH), University of California San Francisco

2. Planned Parenthood of the St. Louis Region and Southwest Missouri, St Louis

3. Whole Woman’s Health & Whole Woman’s Health Alliance, Charlottesville, Virginia

Abstract

ImportanceIn the US, access to medication abortion using history-based (no-test) eligibility assessment, including through telehealth and mailing of mifepristone, has grown rapidly. Additional evidence on the effectiveness and safety of these models is needed.ObjectiveTo evaluate whether medication abortion with no-test eligibility assessment and mailing of medications is as effective as in-person care with ultrasonography and safe overall.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsProspective, observational study with noninferiority analysis. Sites included 4 abortion-providing organizations in Colorado, Illinois, Maryland, Minnesota, Virginia, and Washington from May 2021 to March 2023. Eligible patients were seeking medication abortion up to and including 70 days’ gestation, spoke English or Spanish, and were aged 15 years or older.ExposureStudy groups reflected the model of care selected by the patient and clinicians and included: (1) no-test (telehealth) eligibility assessment and mailing of medications (no-test + mail) (n = 228); (2) no-test eligibility assessment and pickup of medications (no-test + pickup) (n = 119); or (3) in-person with ultrasonography (n = 238).Main Outcomes and MeasuresEffectiveness, defined as a complete abortion without the need for repeating the mifepristone and misoprostol regimen or a follow-up procedure, and safety, defined as an abortion-related serious adverse event, including overnight hospital admission, surgery, or blood transfusion. Outcomes were derived from patient surveys and medical records. Primary analysis focused on the comparison of the no-test + mail group with the in-person with ultrasonography group.ResultsThe mean age of the participants (N = 585) was 27.3 years; most identified as non-Hispanic White (48.6%) or non-Hispanic Black (28.1%). Median (IQR) gestational duration was 45 days (39-53) and comparable between study groups (P = .30). Outcome data were available for 91.8% of participants. Overall effectiveness was 94.4% (95% CI, 90.7%-99.2%) in the no-test + mail group and 93.3% (95% CI, 88.3%-98.2%) in the in-person with ultrasonography group in adjusted models (adjusted risk difference, 1.2 [95% CI, −4.1 to 6.4]), meeting the prespecified 5% noninferiority margin. Serious adverse events included overnight hospitalization (n = 4), blood transfusion (n = 2), and emergency surgery (n = 1) and were reported by 1.1% (95% CI, 0.4%-2.4%) of participants, with 3 in the no-test + mail group, 3 in the in-person with ultrasonography group, and none in the no-test + pickup group.Conclusions and RelevanceThis prospective, observational study found that medication abortion obtained following no-test telehealth screening and mailing of medications was associated with similar rates of complete abortion compared with in-person care with ultrasonography and met prespecified criteria for noninferiority, with a low prevalence of adverse events.

Publisher

American Medical Association (AMA)

Reference38 articles.

1. Abortion incidence and service availability in the United States, 2020.;Jones;Perspect Sex Reprod Health,2022

2. Abortion incidence and service availability in the United States, 2014.;Jones;Perspect Sex Reprod Health,2017

3. Medication abortion up to 70 days of gestation: ACOG practice bulletin, number 225.;American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists’ Committee on Practice Bulletins—Gynecology, Society of Family Planning;Obstet Gynecol,2020

4. Incidence of emergency department visits and complications after abortion.;Upadhyay;Obstet Gynecol,2015

5. Mifepristone with buccal misoprostol for medical abortion: a systematic review.;Chen;Obstet Gynecol,2015

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3