No abstract

Objectives In 2013, Texas passed omnibus legislation restricting abortion services. Provisions restricting medical abortion, banning most procedures after 20 weeks and requiring physicians to have hospital admitting privileges were enforced in November 2013; by September 2014, abortion facilities must meet the requirements of ambulatory surgical centers (ASCs). We aimed to rapidly assess the change in abortion services after the first three provisions went into effect. Study Design We requested information from all licensed Texas abortion facilities on abortions performed between November 2012 and April 2014, including the abortion method and gestational age (<12 weeks versus ≥12 weeks). Results In May 2013, there were 41 facilities providing abortion in Texas; this decreased to 22 in November 2013. Both clinics closed in the Rio Grande Valley, and all but one closed in West Texas. Comparing November 2012–April 2013 to November 2013–April 2014, there was a 13% decrease in the abortion rate (from 12.9 to 11.2 abortions/1000 women age 15–44). Medical abortion decreased by 70%, from 28.1% of all abortions in the earlier period to 9.7% after November 2013 (p<0.001). Second-trimester abortion increased from 13.5% to 13.9% of all abortions (p<0.001). Only 22% of abortions were performed in the state’s six ASCs. Conclusions The closure of clinics and restrictions on medical abortion in Texas appear to be associated with a decline in the in-state abortion rate and a marked decrease in the number of medical abortions. Implications Supply-side restrictions on abortion—especially restrictions on medical abortion—can have a profound impact on access to services. Access to abortion care will become even further restricted in Texas when the ASC requirement goes into effect in 2014.

Clinic closures after House Bill 2 resulted in significant burdens for women able to obtain care.

Objective To investigate women's patterns of contraceptive use after delivery and the association between method use and risk of pregnancy within 18 months. Methods We used the 2006-2010 National Survey of Family Growth to examine women's contraceptive use after delivery, and at 3, 6, 12, and 18 months after giving birth. The sample included 3,005 births that occurred within 3 years of the survey date and for which information on contraceptive use was available. We estimated multivariable-adjusted Cox regression models to assess the association between women's method use and risk of pregnancy within 18 months after delivery. We also examined the percentage of pregnancies occurring ≤18 months after the index birth that were unintended. Results Between delivery and 3 months postpartum, contraceptive use increased from 21% to 72%. At 3 months, 13% of women used permanent contraception, 6% used long-acting reversible contraceptives, 28% used other hormonal methods and 25% relied on less-effective methods; the distribution of method use was similar in subsequent months. Among women using hormonal methods, 12.6% became pregnant ≤18 months of delivery compared to 0.5% using permanent and long-acting contraception (adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 21.2, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 6.17-72.8). Additionally, 17.8% of women using less-effective methods (HR: 34.8, 95% CI: 9.26-131) and 23% using no method (HR: 43.2, 95% CI: 12.3-152) became pregnant ≤18 months. At least 70% of pregnancies within one year after delivery were unintended. Conclusions Few women use long-acting reversible contraceptives after delivery, and those using less-effective methods have an increased risk of unintended pregnancy.

No abstract

Objective To estimate how well a convenience sample of women from the general population could self-screen for contraindications to combined oral contraceptives using a medical checklist. Methods Women 18-49 years old (N=1,271) were recruited at two shopping malls and a flea market in El Paso, Texas, and asked first whether they thought pills were medically safe for them. They then used a checklist to determine the presence of level 3 or 4 contraindications to combined oral contraceptives according to the World Health Organization Medical Eligibility Criteria. Women were then interviewed by a blinded nurse practitioner who also measured blood pressure. Results The sensitivity of the unaided self-screen to detect true contraindications was 56.2% (95% CI: 51.7%-60.6%) and specificity 57.6% (54.0%-61.1%). The sensitivity of the checklist to detect true contraindications was 83.2% (79.5%-86.3%) and specificity 88.8% (86.3%- 90.9%). Using the checklist, 6.6% (5.2%-8.0%) of women incorrectly thought they were eligible for use when, in fact, they were contraindicated, largely due to unrecognized hypertension. Seven percent (5.4%-8.2%) of women incorrectly thought they were contraindicated when they truly were not, primarily due to misclassification of migraine headaches. In regression analysis, younger women, more educated women and Spanish-speakers were significantly more likely to correctly self-screen (p<0.05). Conclusion Self-screening for contraindications to oral contraceptives using a medical checklist is relatively accurate. Unaided screening is inaccurate and reflects common misperceptions about the safety of oral contraceptives. Over-the-counter provision of this method would likely be safe, especially for younger women and if independent blood pressure screening were encouraged.

The data suggest that doctors frequently persuaded their patients to accept a scheduled cesarean section for conditions that either did not exist or did not justify this procedure. The problem identified in this paper may extend well beyond Brazil and should be of concern to those with responsibility for ethical behavior in obstetrics.

This article analyzes the patterns and determinants of maternal health care utilization in Jordan, using data from the Jordan Fertility and Family Health Survey of 1983. The study focuses on the 2,949 women who had a child in the five years preceding the survey. Through multivariate analyses of differentials in the utilization of prenatal care and health care at delivery, the study assesses the effect of sociodemographic factors, including residence, education, parity, and standard of living. The coverage of maternal health care in Jordan is discussed in relation to the overall organization of health services, the various providers of care, and the role of cultural factors.