5
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Prevalence of Self-Managed Abortion Among Women of Reproductive Age in the United States

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Key Points

          Question

          What is the prevalence of self-managed abortion (SMA) among US women of reproductive age?

          Findings

          In this cross-sectional survey of 7022 women aged 18 to 49, 1.4% reported ever having attempted SMA. Using age at SMA attempt and adjusting for underreporting of abortion, it is estimated that 7.0% of US women will attempt SMA at some point in their lives.

          Meaning

          These findings suggest that SMA is occurring in the US, highlighting the need for innovative models to ensure people have access to the safest and most effective methods of SMA, particularly where facility-based care is inaccessible.

          Abstract

          This cross-sectional study examines the prevalence of and sociodemographic characteristics associated with reporting attempted self-managed abortion among US women.

          Abstract

          Importance

          Increasing evidence indicates that people are attempting their own abortions outside the formal health care system. However, population-based estimates of experience with self-managed abortion (SMA) are lacking.

          Objective

          To estimate the prevalence of SMA attempts among the general US population.

          Design, Setting, and Participants

          This cross-sectional survey study was fielded August 2 to 17, 2017 among English- and Spanish- speaking, self-identified female panel members from the GfK web-based KnowledgePanel. Women ages 18 to 49 years were approached to complete a 1-time survey. Data were analyzed from September 22, 2017, to March 26, 2020.

          Main Outcomes and Measures

          SMA was defined as “some women may do something on their own to try to end a pregnancy without medical assistance. For example, they may get information from the internet, a friend, or family member about pills, medicine, or herbs they can take on their own, or they may do something else to try to end the pregnancy.” SMA was assessed using the question, “Have you ever taken or used something on your own, without medical assistance, to try to end an unwanted pregnancy?” Participants reporting SMA were asked about methods used, reasons, and outcomes. Factors associated with SMA experience, including age, race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status, nativity, reproductive health history, and geography, were assessed. Projected lifetime SMA prevalence was estimated using discrete-time event history models, adjusting for abortion underreporting.

          Results

          Among 14 151 participants invited to participate, 7022 women (49.6%) (mean [SE] age, 33.9 [9.0] years) agreed to participate. Among these, 57.4% (95% CI, 55.8%-59.0%) were non-Hispanic White, 20.2% (95% CI, 18.9%-21.5%) were Hispanic, and 13.3% (95% CI, 12.1%-14.5%) were non-Hispanic Black; and 15.1% (95% CI, 14.1%-16.3%) reported living at less than 100% federal poverty level (FPL). A total of 1.4% (95% CI, 1.0%-1.8%) of participants reported a history of attempting SMA while in the US. Projected lifetime prevalence of SMA adjusting for underreporting of abortion was 7.0% (95% CI, 5.5%-8.4%). In bivariable analyses, non-Hispanic Black (prevalence ratio [PR], 3.16; 95% CI, 1.48-6.75) and Hispanic women surveyed in English (PR, 3.74; 95% CI, 1.78-7.87) were more likely than non-Hispanic White women to have attempted SMA. Women living below 100% of the FPL were also more likely to have attempted SMA compared with those at 200% FPL or greater (PR, 3.43; 95% CI, 1.83-6.42). At most recent SMA attempt, 20.0% (95% CI, 10.9%-33.8%) of respondents used misoprostol, 29.2% (95% CI, 17.5%-44.5%) used another medication or drug, 38.4% (95% CI, 25.3%-53.4%) used herbs, and 19.8% (95% CI, 10.0%-35.5%) used physical methods. The most common reasons for SMA included that it seemed faster or easier (47.2% [95% CI, 33.0%-61.8%]) and the clinic was too expensive (25.2% [95% CI, 15.7%-37.7%]). Of all attempts, 27.8% (95% CI, 16.6%-42.7%) of respondents reported they were successful; the remainder reported they had subsequent facility-based abortions (33.6% [95% CI, 21.0%-49.0%]), continued the pregnancy (13.4% [95% CI, 7.4%-23.1%]), had a miscarriage (11.4% [95% CI, 4.2%-27.5%]), or were unsure (13.3% [95% CI, 6.8%-24.7%]). A total of 11.0% (95% CI, 5.5%-21.0%) of respondents reported a complication.

          Conclusions and Relevance

          This cross-sectional study found that approximately 7% of US women reported having attempted SMA in their lifetime, commonly with ineffective methods. These findings suggest that surveys of SMA experience among patients at abortion clinics may capture only one-third of SMA attempts. People’s reasons for attempting SMA indicate that as abortion becomes more restricted, SMA may become more common.

          Related collections

          Most cited references31

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Declines in Unintended Pregnancy in the United States, 2008-2011.

          The rate of unintended pregnancy in the United States increased slightly between 2001 and 2008 and is higher than that in many other industrialized countries. National trends have not been reported since 2008.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Global, regional, and subregional classification of abortions by safety, 2010–14: estimates from a Bayesian hierarchical model

            Summary Background Global estimates of unsafe abortions have been produced for 1995, 2003, and 2008. However, reconceptualisation of the framework and methods for estimating abortion safety is needed owing to the increased availability of simple methods for safe abortion (eg, medical abortion), the increasingly widespread use of misoprostol outside formal health systems in contexts where abortion is legally restricted, and the need to account for the multiple factors that affect abortion safety. Methods We used all available empirical data on abortion methods, providers, and settings, and factors affecting safety as covariates within a Bayesian hierarchical model to estimate the global, regional, and subregional distributions of abortion by safety categories. We used a three-tiered categorisation based on the WHO definition of unsafe abortion and WHO guidelines on safe abortion to categorise abortions as safe or unsafe and to further divide unsafe abortions into two categories of less safe and least safe. Findings Of the 55· 7 million abortions that occurred worldwide each year between 2010–14, we estimated that 30·6 million (54·9%, 90% uncertainty interval 49·9–59·4) were safe, 17·1 million (30·7%, 25·5–35·6) were less safe, and 8·0 million (14·4%, 11·5–18·1) were least safe. Thus, 25·1 million (45·1%, 40·6–50·1) abortions each year between 2010 and 2014 were unsafe, with 24·3 million (97%) of these in developing countries. The proportion of unsafe abortions was significantly higher in developing countries than developed countries (49·5% vs 12·5%). When grouped by the legal status of abortion, the proportion of unsafe abortions was significantly higher in countries with highly restrictive abortion laws than in those with less restrictive laws. Interpretation Increased efforts are needed, especially in developing countries, to ensure access to safe abortion. The paucity of empirical data is a limitation of these findings. Improved in-country data for health services and innovative research to address these gaps are needed to improve future estimates. Funding UNDP/UNFPA/UNICEF/WHO/World Bank Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction; David and Lucile Packard Foundation; UK Aid from the UK Government; Dutch Ministry of Foreign Affairs; Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Health care experiences of pregnant, birthing and postnatal women of color at risk for preterm birth

              Chronic stress is a known risk factor for preterm birth, yet little is known about how healthcare experiences add to or mitigate perceived stress. In this study, we described the pregnancy-related healthcare experiences of 54 women of color from Fresno, Oakland, and San Francisco, California, with social and/or medical risk factors for preterm birth.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                JAMA Netw Open
                JAMA Netw Open
                JAMA Netw Open
                JAMA Network Open
                American Medical Association
                2574-3805
                18 December 2020
                December 2020
                18 December 2020
                : 3
                : 12
                : e2029245
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Advancing New Standards in Reproductive Health, Bixby Center for Global Reproductive Health, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, University of California, San Francisco
                [2 ]Department of Population and Family Health, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, New York
                [3 ]Ibis Reproductive Health, Oakland, California
                Author notes
                Article Information
                Accepted for Publication: October 20, 2020.
                Published: December 18, 2020. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.29245
                Open Access: This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC-BY License. © 2020 Ralph L et al. JAMA Network Open.
                Corresponding Author: Lauren Ralph, PhD, Advancing New Standards in Reproductive Health, Bixby Center for Global Reproductive Health, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, University of California San Francisco, 1330 Broadway, Ste 1100, Oakland, California 94612 ( lauren.ralph@ 123456ucsf.edu ).
                Author Contributions: Drs Grossman and Ralph had full access to all of the data in the study and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.
                Concept and design: Ralph, Biggs, Upadhyay, Gerdts, Grossman.
                Acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data: All authors.
                Drafting of the manuscript: Ralph, Biggs, Gerdts, Grossman.
                Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: All authors.
                Statistical analysis: Ralph, Foster, Biggs, Samari, Gerdts.
                Obtained funding: Raifman, Grossman.
                Administrative, technical, or material support: Raifman, Grossman.
                Supervision: Grossman.
                Conflict of Interest Disclosures: None reported.
                Funding/Support: This work was supported by the David and Lucile Packard Foundation, DeMartini Family Foundation, Fidelity Charitable, and an anonymous foundation. Dr Ralph was supported by grant No. 2K12 HD052163 from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, Office of Research on Women’s Health, Building Interdisciplinary Research Careers in Women’s Health.
                Role of the Funder/Sponsor: The funders had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication.
                Article
                zoi200931
                10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.29245
                7749440
                33337493
                42aaf1e4-58bd-4534-914c-72d07442e7d6
                Copyright 2020 Ralph L et al. JAMA Network Open.

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC-BY License.

                History
                : 22 July 2020
                : 20 October 2020
                Categories
                Research
                Original Investigation
                Online Only
                Public Health

                Comments

                Comment on this article