M. Antonia Biggs , C. Finley Baba , Lauren J. Ralph , Rosalyn Schroeder , Colleen McNicholas , Amy Hagstrom Miller , Daniel Grossman
{"title":"Psychosocial burden of seeking medication abortion when using no-test telehealth care compared to in-person care with ultrasound","authors":"M. Antonia Biggs , C. Finley Baba , Lauren J. Ralph , Rosalyn Schroeder , Colleen McNicholas , Amy Hagstrom Miller , Daniel Grossman","doi":"10.1016/j.contraception.2025.110894","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>To explore the relationship between abortion care model and living in a state with an abortion ban with the psychosocial burden of care-seeking.</div></div><div><h3>Study design</h3><div>From May 2021 to March 2023, we surveyed patients obtaining medication abortion ≤70 days gestation, ages ≥15 years at four abortion clinic organizations in six U.S. states. We used negative binomial regression to assess three psychosocial burden dimensions: structural challenges (5 items, α = 0.80), lack of autonomy (3 items, α = 0.73), and others’ reactions to the pregnancy (2 items, α = 0.88) by abortion care model (no-test telehealth + mail, no-test + pickup, and in-person + ultrasound) and living in an abortion-ban state.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>400 people completed psychosocial burden items. In adjusted analyses, no-test telehealth + mail was associated with less overall psychosocial burden (incident rate ratio [IRR] 0.82, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.70, 0.95), including fewer structural challenges (IRR 0.78, 95% CI 0.67, 0.91) and less lack of autonomy (IRR 0.65, 95% CI 0.47, 0.90) than in-person + ultrasound, mostly due to less difficulty traveling (24% vs 32%, <em>p</em> < 0.05) and feeling less forced to wait after deciding (11% vs 22%, <em>p</em> < 0.05). People in abortion-ban states reported more psychosocial burden (IRR 1.62, 95% CI 1.26, 2.08) including more structural challenges (IRR 1.95 0.36, 95% CI 1.53, 2.29) than people in states without bans.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>No-test telehealth abortion care may reduce the psychosocial burden of care-seeking, especially the difficulties of travel and feeling forced to wait for care.</div></div><div><h3>Implications</h3><div>Findings add to the body of evidence in support of expanding telehealth abortion care by reducing travel burden and potentially increasing autonomous decision-making when seeking abortion care.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":10762,"journal":{"name":"Contraception","volume":"147 ","pages":"Article 110894"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Contraception","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S001078242500085X","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives
To explore the relationship between abortion care model and living in a state with an abortion ban with the psychosocial burden of care-seeking.
Study design
From May 2021 to March 2023, we surveyed patients obtaining medication abortion ≤70 days gestation, ages ≥15 years at four abortion clinic organizations in six U.S. states. We used negative binomial regression to assess three psychosocial burden dimensions: structural challenges (5 items, α = 0.80), lack of autonomy (3 items, α = 0.73), and others’ reactions to the pregnancy (2 items, α = 0.88) by abortion care model (no-test telehealth + mail, no-test + pickup, and in-person + ultrasound) and living in an abortion-ban state.
Results
400 people completed psychosocial burden items. In adjusted analyses, no-test telehealth + mail was associated with less overall psychosocial burden (incident rate ratio [IRR] 0.82, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.70, 0.95), including fewer structural challenges (IRR 0.78, 95% CI 0.67, 0.91) and less lack of autonomy (IRR 0.65, 95% CI 0.47, 0.90) than in-person + ultrasound, mostly due to less difficulty traveling (24% vs 32%, p < 0.05) and feeling less forced to wait after deciding (11% vs 22%, p < 0.05). People in abortion-ban states reported more psychosocial burden (IRR 1.62, 95% CI 1.26, 2.08) including more structural challenges (IRR 1.95 0.36, 95% CI 1.53, 2.29) than people in states without bans.
Conclusions
No-test telehealth abortion care may reduce the psychosocial burden of care-seeking, especially the difficulties of travel and feeling forced to wait for care.
Implications
Findings add to the body of evidence in support of expanding telehealth abortion care by reducing travel burden and potentially increasing autonomous decision-making when seeking abortion care.
期刊介绍:
Contraception has an open access mirror journal Contraception: X, sharing the same aims and scope, editorial team, submission system and rigorous peer review.
The journal Contraception wishes to advance reproductive health through the rapid publication of the best and most interesting new scholarship regarding contraception and related fields such as abortion. The journal welcomes manuscripts from investigators working in the laboratory, clinical and social sciences, as well as public health and health professions education.