Karen L Roper, Sarah Jane Robbins, Philip Day, Grace Shih, Neelima Kale
{"title":"Impact of State Abortion Policies on Family Medicine Practice and Training After <i>Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization</i>.","authors":"Karen L Roper, Sarah Jane Robbins, Philip Day, Grace Shih, Neelima Kale","doi":"10.1370/afm.3183","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The <i>Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization</i> (Dobbs) Supreme Court decision revoked the constitutional right to abortion. Now, restrictive state abortion laws may contribute to the shortage and strain already felt in primary care practice, especially related to the provision of reproductive health care. The purpose of this study is to evaluate perceived impacts of state abortion legislation on family medicine clinicians' practice and medical education regarding reproductive health care.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Ten questions were added to the 2022 Council of Academic Family Medicine Educational Research Alliance general membership survey to evaluate impact on relevant themes in reproductive health care and training after the Dobbs decision. Responses were categorized by severity of restriction of state abortion policies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 1,196 respondents, 49.7% reported employment in states with very restrictive or restrictive abortion policies. The 991 respondents with clinical responsibilities reported significant (<i>P</i> <.05) changes in their counseling practices, clinical decision making, worry of legal risks, and trust in patients' self-reported reproductive medical history, compared with peers in protective states. Perceived patient trust toward clinicians remained unchanged. Almost one-half of clinical respondents reported an absence of reproductive health care guidance or recommendations. Restrictive abortion policies significantly (<i>P</i> <.05) reduced the desirability and confidence in resident training programs.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Reported changes to clinical activities and training, coming early after the Dobbs decision, affect our current and future workforce and therefore, our patients. Future studies are needed to document continued impact of state restrictions and inform policy to support family medicine clinicians in reproductive health practice and education.</p>","PeriodicalId":50973,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Family Medicine","volume":"22 6","pages":"492-501"},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11588381/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Family Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.3183","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: The Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization (Dobbs) Supreme Court decision revoked the constitutional right to abortion. Now, restrictive state abortion laws may contribute to the shortage and strain already felt in primary care practice, especially related to the provision of reproductive health care. The purpose of this study is to evaluate perceived impacts of state abortion legislation on family medicine clinicians' practice and medical education regarding reproductive health care.
Methods: Ten questions were added to the 2022 Council of Academic Family Medicine Educational Research Alliance general membership survey to evaluate impact on relevant themes in reproductive health care and training after the Dobbs decision. Responses were categorized by severity of restriction of state abortion policies.
Results: Of 1,196 respondents, 49.7% reported employment in states with very restrictive or restrictive abortion policies. The 991 respondents with clinical responsibilities reported significant (P <.05) changes in their counseling practices, clinical decision making, worry of legal risks, and trust in patients' self-reported reproductive medical history, compared with peers in protective states. Perceived patient trust toward clinicians remained unchanged. Almost one-half of clinical respondents reported an absence of reproductive health care guidance or recommendations. Restrictive abortion policies significantly (P <.05) reduced the desirability and confidence in resident training programs.
Conclusions: Reported changes to clinical activities and training, coming early after the Dobbs decision, affect our current and future workforce and therefore, our patients. Future studies are needed to document continued impact of state restrictions and inform policy to support family medicine clinicians in reproductive health practice and education.
目的:最高法院对 "多布斯诉杰克逊妇女健康组织案"(Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization,简称 Dobbs 案)的判决废除了宪法规定的堕胎权。现在,各州限制堕胎的法律可能会加剧初级保健实践中已经感受到的短缺和压力,特别是与提供生殖保健相关的短缺和压力。本研究旨在评估各州堕胎法对全科临床医生在生殖健康护理方面的实践和医学教育的影响:方法:在 2022 年全科医学教育研究联盟(Council of Academic Family Medicine Educational Research Alliance)普通会员调查中增加了 10 个问题,以评估多布斯案判决后对生殖健康护理和培训相关主题的影响。根据各州堕胎政策限制的严重程度对回答进行分类:在 1,196 名受访者中,49.7% 的受访者表示其所在州的堕胎政策非常严格或严格。有临床职责的 991 名受访者报告说,他们的临床活动和培训发生了重大变化:多布斯案判决后不久,临床活动和培训就发生了变化,这些变化影响了我们当前和未来的工作队伍,因此也影响了我们的患者。今后需要开展研究,记录各州限制措施的持续影响,并为支持全科临床医生开展生殖健康实践和教育的政策提供信息。
期刊介绍:
The Annals of Family Medicine is a peer-reviewed research journal to meet the needs of scientists, practitioners, policymakers, and the patients and communities they serve.