{"title":"Test or No-Test: Comparison of Medication Abortion Outcomes and Adverse Events When Forgoing Ultrasound, Laboratory Testing, and Physical Examination","authors":"Caitlin Hunter MD, CCFP , Maya Burck BA , Colleen Chambers MSc , Farhana Shawon MD , M. Ruth Lavergne PhD , Amanda Whitten MA, MD, CCFP , Mei-ling Wiedmeyer MD, CCFP, MSc","doi":"10.1016/j.jogc.2024.102730","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>This study aimed to compare demographics and clinical outcomes between patients who did not undergo investigations and those who underwent investigations before receiving a prescription for medication abortion (MA) during the first 6 months of the COVID-19 pandemic. Outcomes include success rates, adverse events, pathways to completion, and loss to follow-up rates.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We conducted a retrospective medical record review of 1452 patients presenting for MA between 23 March 2020 and 30 September 2020. Descriptive statistics, 2 × 2 chi-square tests, and Fisher exact tests were used to compare characteristics and outcomes between groups.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Of the 1307 patients who received a prescription, 895 (68.5%) were in the no-test group and 412 (31.5%) were in the test group. The success rate was 95.2%, with no significant difference between groups (94.0% and 95.8%, <em>P</em> = 0.194). Rates of adverse events were low, with 28 patients presenting for emergency department visits (2.1%), 62 having clinically significant retained products of conception (4.7%), 5 with heavy bleeding requiring treatment (0.4%), 16 with ongoing pregnancy (1.2%), and 3 requiring ectopic pregnancy management (0.2%). Completion of abortion was verified in 1034 patients (80.5%), and the loss to follow-up rate was 22.6%, with no difference between the groups (82.1% vs. 79.8%, <em>P</em> = 0.341; and 21.4% vs. 23.1%, <em>P</em> = 0.477; respectively).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>We found that clinical outcomes were consistent across the 2 groups, with high success rates and low adverse event rates. Our study contributes to the growing body of evidence that allows for individualized care implementing selective use of low- and no-test MA protocols.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":16688,"journal":{"name":"Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology Canada","volume":"47 1","pages":"Article 102730"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology Canada","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S170121632400553X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives
This study aimed to compare demographics and clinical outcomes between patients who did not undergo investigations and those who underwent investigations before receiving a prescription for medication abortion (MA) during the first 6 months of the COVID-19 pandemic. Outcomes include success rates, adverse events, pathways to completion, and loss to follow-up rates.
Methods
We conducted a retrospective medical record review of 1452 patients presenting for MA between 23 March 2020 and 30 September 2020. Descriptive statistics, 2 × 2 chi-square tests, and Fisher exact tests were used to compare characteristics and outcomes between groups.
Results
Of the 1307 patients who received a prescription, 895 (68.5%) were in the no-test group and 412 (31.5%) were in the test group. The success rate was 95.2%, with no significant difference between groups (94.0% and 95.8%, P = 0.194). Rates of adverse events were low, with 28 patients presenting for emergency department visits (2.1%), 62 having clinically significant retained products of conception (4.7%), 5 with heavy bleeding requiring treatment (0.4%), 16 with ongoing pregnancy (1.2%), and 3 requiring ectopic pregnancy management (0.2%). Completion of abortion was verified in 1034 patients (80.5%), and the loss to follow-up rate was 22.6%, with no difference between the groups (82.1% vs. 79.8%, P = 0.341; and 21.4% vs. 23.1%, P = 0.477; respectively).
Conclusions
We found that clinical outcomes were consistent across the 2 groups, with high success rates and low adverse event rates. Our study contributes to the growing body of evidence that allows for individualized care implementing selective use of low- and no-test MA protocols.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Canada (JOGC) is Canada"s peer-reviewed journal of obstetrics, gynaecology, and women"s health. Each monthly issue contains original research articles, reviews, case reports, commentaries, and editorials on all aspects of reproductive health. JOGC is the original publication source of evidence-based clinical guidelines, committee opinions, and policy statements that derive from standing or ad hoc committees of the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada. JOGC is included in the National Library of Medicine"s MEDLINE database, and abstracts from JOGC are accessible on PubMed.