Trends in medication abortion and the role of low-volume and nonmetropolitan mifepristone purchasers: 2008–2011 and 2014–2017

Q2 Medicine
Rachel K. Jones
{"title":"Trends in medication abortion and the role of low-volume and nonmetropolitan mifepristone purchasers: 2008–2011 and 2014–2017","authors":"Rachel K. Jones","doi":"10.1016/j.conx.2020.100042","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>The objective was to examine trends in the number of low-volume and nonmetropolitan mifepristone purchasers and their role in the expansion of medication abortion.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We use deidentified data from Danco Laboratories, the sole distributor of mifepristone during the study period, to examine trends in mifepristone distribution. We focus on customers who purchased &lt;<!--> <!-->100 doses a year and a subset of those who purchased &lt;<!--> <!-->10 doses for the periods of 2008–2011 and 2014–2017. We use data from the Guttmacher Institute Abortion Provider Census (APC) studies in 2008 and 2017 to examine the extent to which some facilities that purchased mifepristone may be missing from Guttmacher's APC.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Between 2008 and 2017, the number of medication abortions increased 73%, though the number of mifepristone purchasers only increased 15%. The number of low-volume mifepristone customers, or those who purchased &lt;<!--> <!-->100 tablets of mifepristone per year, decreased 8% over the study period, while the number purchasing &lt;<!--> <!-->10 tablets per year decreased 14%. However, in recent years, low-volume customers were more likely to have purchased mifepristone in multiple years. In nonmetropolitan areas, the number of sites purchasing mifepristone increased slightly but the amount of mifepristone that was purchased more than doubled between 2008 and 2017.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>While reliance on medication abortion increased substantially between 2008 and 2017, there is no evidence that this was due to an increase in the number of facilities that purchased low volumes of mifepristone.</p></div><div><h3>Implications</h3><p>While their numbers declined, abortion providers purchasing low volumes of mifepristone likely played an important role for the individuals they cared for. Access to abortion could increase if a wider network of health care practitioners, especially those in settings that do not currently provide abortions, was able to offer medication abortion.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":10655,"journal":{"name":"Contraception: X","volume":"2 ","pages":"Article 100042"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.conx.2020.100042","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Contraception: X","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590151620300253","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

The objective was to examine trends in the number of low-volume and nonmetropolitan mifepristone purchasers and their role in the expansion of medication abortion.

Methods

We use deidentified data from Danco Laboratories, the sole distributor of mifepristone during the study period, to examine trends in mifepristone distribution. We focus on customers who purchased < 100 doses a year and a subset of those who purchased < 10 doses for the periods of 2008–2011 and 2014–2017. We use data from the Guttmacher Institute Abortion Provider Census (APC) studies in 2008 and 2017 to examine the extent to which some facilities that purchased mifepristone may be missing from Guttmacher's APC.

Results

Between 2008 and 2017, the number of medication abortions increased 73%, though the number of mifepristone purchasers only increased 15%. The number of low-volume mifepristone customers, or those who purchased < 100 tablets of mifepristone per year, decreased 8% over the study period, while the number purchasing < 10 tablets per year decreased 14%. However, in recent years, low-volume customers were more likely to have purchased mifepristone in multiple years. In nonmetropolitan areas, the number of sites purchasing mifepristone increased slightly but the amount of mifepristone that was purchased more than doubled between 2008 and 2017.

Conclusions

While reliance on medication abortion increased substantially between 2008 and 2017, there is no evidence that this was due to an increase in the number of facilities that purchased low volumes of mifepristone.

Implications

While their numbers declined, abortion providers purchasing low volumes of mifepristone likely played an important role for the individuals they cared for. Access to abortion could increase if a wider network of health care practitioners, especially those in settings that do not currently provide abortions, was able to offer medication abortion.

Abstract Image

药物流产的趋势以及小批量和非大都市米非司酮购买者的作用:2008-2011年和2014-2017年
目的:目的是检查小容量和非大都市米非司酮购买者数量的趋势及其在药物流产扩大中的作用。方法我们使用研究期间米非司酮唯一经销商Danco实验室的鉴定数据来检查米非司酮的分布趋势。我们专注于购买<每年100剂,一部分购买了<2008-2011年和2014-2017年期间接种10剂。我们使用2008年和2017年古特马赫研究所堕胎提供者普查(APC)研究的数据来检查购买米非司酮的一些设施在多大程度上可能从古特马赫的APC中缺失。结果2008年至2017年,药物流产数量增加了73%,但米非司酮购买者数量仅增加了15%。小批量米非司酮客户的数量,或购买米非司酮的数量;在研究期间,每年购买100片米非司酮的人数减少了8%,而购买<每年10片减少14%。然而,近年来,小批量客户更有可能在多年内购买米非司酮。在非大都市地区,购买米非司酮的地点数量略有增加,但购买的米非司酮数量在2008年至2017年期间增加了一倍多。虽然对药物流产的依赖在2008年至2017年期间大幅增加,但没有证据表明这是由于购买低剂量米非司酮的机构数量增加所致。当他们的数量下降时,堕胎提供者购买低剂量的米非司酮可能对他们所照顾的个体起了重要作用。如果更广泛的保健从业人员网络,特别是目前不提供堕胎的环境中的从业人员能够提供药物堕胎,那么堕胎的机会就会增加。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Contraception: X
Contraception: X Medicine-Obstetrics and Gynecology
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
17
审稿时长
22 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信