Effectiveness, safety and acceptability of no-test medical abortion provided via telemedicine: a national cohort study

Abstract

Objective To compare the effectiveness, safety and acceptability of medical abortion before and after the introduction of no-test telemedicine Design Cohort study Setting The three main abortion providers in England Population All patients having an early medical abortion (comprising 85% of all medical abortions performed nationally) Methods Comparison of no-test telemedicine hybrid model vs. traditional model (blanket in-person provision including ultrasound), adjusted for baseline differences Main outcome measures Access: waiting time, gestation Effectiveness: successful medical abortion Safety: significant adverse events; ectopic pregnancy and late gestation Acceptability: Patient-reported outcomes Results 52,142 medical abortions were conducted, 29,984 in the telemedicine-hybrid cohort and 22,158 in the traditional cohort. Mean waiting times were 4.2 days shorter in the telemedicine-hybrid cohort and 40% were ≤6 weeks’ gestation vs. 25% in the traditional cohort (p<0.001). There was no difference in success rates (98.8% vs. 98.2%, p=1.0), nor in prevalence of serious adverse events (0.02% vs. 0.04%, p=0.557). Incidence of ectopic pregnancy was equivalent in both cohorts (0.2%, p=0.796); 0.04% of abortions appeared to have been provided after 10 weeks’ gestation with all completed safely at home. In the telemedicine-hybrid cohort, effectiveness was higher in the telemedicine group vs. the in-person group (99.2% vs. 98.1%, p<0.001). Acceptability was high (96% satisfied), 80% reported a future preference for telemedicine, and none reported that they were unable to consult in private using teleconsultation. Conclusions Medical abortion provided through a hybrid model that includes no-test telemedicine without ultrasound is effective, safe, acceptable, and improves access to care. Funding None