7
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Abortion regulation in Europe in the era of COVID-19: a spectrum of policy responses

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Unprecedented public health actions restricting movement and non-COVID related health services are likely to have affected abortion care during the pandemic in Europe. In the absence of a common approach to ensure access to this essential health service, we sought to describe the variability of abortion policies during the outbreak in Europe in order to identify strategies that improve availability and access to abortion in times of public health crises.

          Methods

          We collected information from 46 countries/regions: 31 for which country-experts completed a survey and 15 for which we conducted a desk review. We describe abortion regulations and changes to regulations and practice during the pandemic.

          Results

          During COVID-19, abortions were banned in six countries and suspended in one. Surgical abortion was less available due to COVID-19 in 12 countries/regions and services were not available or delayed for women with COVID-19 symptoms in eleven. No country expanded its gestational limit for abortion. Changes during COVID-19, mostly designed to reduce in-person consultations, occurred in 13 countries/regions. Altogether eight countries/regions provided home medical abortion with mifepristone and misoprostol beyond 9 weeks (from 9 weeks+6 days to 11 weeks+6 days) and 13 countries/regions up to 9 weeks (in some instances only misoprostol could be taken at home). Only six countries/regions offered abortion by telemedicine.

          Conclusions

          The lack of a unified policy response to COVID-19 restrictions has widened inequities in abortion access in Europe, but some innovations including telemedicine deployed during the outbreak could serve as a catalyst to ensure continuity and equity of abortion care.

          Related collections

          Most cited references9

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found
          Is Open Access

          Global causes of maternal death: a WHO systematic analysis.

          Data for the causes of maternal deaths are needed to inform policies to improve maternal health. We developed and analysed global, regional, and subregional estimates of the causes of maternal death during 2003-09, with a novel method, updating the previous WHO systematic review. We searched specialised and general bibliographic databases for articles published between between Jan 1, 2003, and Dec 31, 2012, for research data, with no language restrictions, and the WHO mortality database for vital registration data. On the basis of prespecified inclusion criteria, we analysed causes of maternal death from datasets. We aggregated country level estimates to report estimates of causes of death by Millennium Development Goal regions and worldwide, for main and subcauses of death categories with a Bayesian hierarchical model. We identified 23 eligible studies (published 2003-12). We included 417 datasets from 115 countries comprising 60 799 deaths in the analysis. About 73% (1 771 000 of 2 443 000) of all maternal deaths between 2003 and 2009 were due to direct obstetric causes and deaths due to indirect causes accounted for 27·5% (672 000, 95% UI 19·7-37·5) of all deaths. Haemorrhage accounted for 27·1% (661 000, 19·9-36·2), hypertensive disorders 14·0% (343 000, 11·1-17·4), and sepsis 10·7% (261 000, 5·9-18·6) of maternal deaths. The rest of deaths were due to abortion (7·9% [193 000], 4·7-13·2), embolism (3·2% [78 000], 1·8-5·5), and all other direct causes of death (9·6% [235 000], 6·5-14·3). Regional estimates varied substantially. Between 2003 and 2009, haemorrhage, hypertensive disorders, and sepsis were responsible for more than half of maternal deaths worldwide. More than a quarter of deaths were attributable to indirect causes. These analyses should inform the prioritisation of health policies, programmes, and funding to reduce maternal deaths at regional and global levels. Further efforts are needed to improve the availability and quality of data related to maternal mortality. © 2014 World Health Organization; licensee Elsevier. This is an Open Access article published without any waiver of WHO's privileges and immunities under international law, convention, or agreement. This article should not be reproduced for use in association with the promotion of commercial products, services, or any legal entity. There should be no suggestion that WHO endorses any specific organisation or products. The use of the WHO logo is not permitted. This notice should be preserved along with the article's original URL.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Violence against women during covid-19 pandemic restrictions

            Protections for women and girls must be built into response plans
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Telemedicine for medical abortion: a systematic review

              Background Telemedicine is increasingly being used to access abortion services. Objective To assess the success rate, safety, and acceptability for women and providers of medical abortion using telemedicine. Search strategy We searched PubMed, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Web of Science up until 10 November 2017. Study criteria We selected studies where telemedicine was used for comprehensive medical abortion services, i.e. assessment/counselling, treatment, and follow up, reporting on success rate (continuing pregnancy, complete abortion, and surgical evacuation), safety (rate of blood transfusion and hospitalisation) or acceptability (satisfaction, dissatisfaction, and recommendation of the service). Data collection and analysis Quantitative outcomes were summarised as a range of median rates. Qualitative data were summarised in a narrative synthesis. Main results Rates relevant to success rate, safety, and acceptability outcomes for women ≤10+0 weeks’ gestation (GW) ranged from 0 to 1.9% for continuing pregnancy, 93.8 to 96.4% for complete abortion, 0.9 to 19.3% for surgical evacuation, 0 to 0.7% for blood transfusion, 0.07 to 2.8% for hospitalisation, 64 to 100% for satisfaction, 0.2 to 2.3% for dissatisfaction, and 90 to 98% for recommendation of the service. Rates in studies also including women >10+0 GW ranged from 1.3 to 2.3% for continuing pregnancy, 8.5 to 20.9% for surgical evacuation, and 90 to 100% for satisfaction. Qualitative studies on acceptability showed no negative impacts for women or providers. Conclusion Based on a synthesis of mainly self‐reported data, medical abortion through telemedicine seems to be highly acceptable to women and providers, success rate and safety outcomes are similar to those reported in literature for in‐person abortion care, and surgical evacuation rates are higher. Tweetable abstract A systematic review of medical abortion through telemedicine shows outcome rates similar to in‐person care.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMJ Sex Reprod Health
                BMJ Sex Reprod Health
                familyplanning
                bmjsrh
                BMJ Sexual & Reproductive Health
                BMJ Publishing Group (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                2515-1991
                2515-2009
                October 2021
                22 October 2020
                : 47
                : 4
                : e14
                Affiliations
                [1 ] departmentPopulation Family and Reproductive Health , Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health , Baltimore, Maryland, USA
                [2 ] departmentSoins et Santé Primaire, Centre for Research in Epidemiology and Population Health (CESP) INSERM 1018 , INSERM , Villejuif, France
                [3 ] departmentDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology , University of Edinburgh , Edinburgh, UK
                [4 ] departmentSexual and Reproductive Health Services , NHS Lothian , Edinburgh, Scotland
                [5 ] departmentDepartment of Women’s and Children’s Health , Karolinska Institute , Stockholm, Sweden
                Author notes
                [Correspondence to ] Dr Caroline Moreau, Population Family and Reproductive Health, Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA; cmoreau2@ 123456jhu.edu
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8637-6249
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1168-2276
                Article
                bmjsrh-2020-200724
                10.1136/bmjsrh-2020-200724
                8515109
                33093040
                952d64f3-d8a2-4725-9dc8-159800864400
                © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

                This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.

                History
                : 30 May 2020
                : 25 August 2020
                : 03 September 2020
                Categories
                Original Research
                1506
                1612
                Custom metadata
                unlocked
                press-release

                abortion,family planning policy,health policy,reproductive health services

                Comments

                Comment on this article