Author:
Lindig Anja,Heger Stefanie,Zill Jördis Maria
Abstract
Abstract
Introduction
Person-centeredness is a key principle in the German healthcare system. However, access to high-quality care for women with unintended pregnancy is limited due to social stigma and legal restrictions. There is little research on the adoption of person-centeredness in care for women with unintended pregnancy. The aim of this study was to analyze relevance and actual implementation of dimensions of person-centeredness in psycho-social and medical abortion care from the view of abortion care providers.
Methods
Counselors and gynecologist working in psycho-social or medical abortion care participated in one of two digital workshops. Discussions were semi-structured based on the 16 dimensions of an integrative model of person-centeredness, audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. During qualitative content analysis, deductive categories based on the integrative model of person-centeredness were applied and inductive categories were developed. Additionally, participants rated relevance and actual implementation of the dimensions in an online survey.
Results
The 18 workshop participants most intensively discussed the dimensions “access to care”, “person-centered characteristics of healthcare providers” and “personally tailored information”. Four additional categories on a macro level (“stigmatization of women with unintended pregnancy”, “stigmatization of healthcare providers”, “political and legal aspects” and “corona pandemic”) were identified. Most dimensions were rated as highly relevant but implementation status was described as rather low.
Conclusions
In Germany, high quality person-centered care for women with unintended pregnancy is insufficiently implemented through limited access to information, a lack of abortion care providers, and stigmatization. There is a need for changes in health care structures to enable nationwide person-centered care for women with unintended pregnancy. Those changes include a more easy access to evidence-based information and person-centered abortion care, more education on abortion care for healthcare providers, integration of topics of abortion care in medical schools and promotion of de-stigmatizing actions to enable abortions as part of the general healthcare.
Funder
German Federal Ministry of Health
Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf (UKE)
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference56 articles.
1. Bearak J, Popinchalk A, Ganatra B, Moller AB, Tunçalp Ö, Beavin C, et al. Unintended pregnancy and abortion by income, region, and the legal status of abortion: estimates from a comprehensive model for 1990–2019. Lancet Glob Heal. 2020;8(9):e1152–61.
2. Hil/aerzteblatt.de. Ärzte für mehr Informationsfreiheit bei Schwangerschaftsabbrüchen. https://www.aerzteblatt.de/nachrichten/103982/Aerzte-fuer-mehr-Informationsfreiheit-bei-Schwangerschaftsabbruechen.
3. Tagesschau. Immer weniger Abtreibungsärzte. https://www.tagesschau.de/inland/kontraste-abtreibung-103.html.
4. Hanschmidt F, Kaiser J, Stepan H, Kersting A. The change in attitudes towards abortion in former west and east germany after reunification: a latent class analysis and implications for abortion access. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd. 2020;80(1):84–94.
5. Levels M, Sluiter R, Need A. A review of abortion laws in Western-European countries. A cross-national comparison of legal developments between 1960 and 2010. Health Policy (New York). 2014;118(1):95–104.