Evaluation of telemedicine medical abortion using a no-test protocol in the Eastern Europe and Central Asian region: Evidence from Ukraine, Uzbekistan, and Azerbaijan.

Azerbaijan Ukraine Uzbekistan medical abortion no‐test telemedicine

Journal

International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics
ISSN: 1879-3479
Titre abrégé: Int J Gynaecol Obstet
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0210174

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
27 May 2024
Historique:
revised: 10 04 2024
received: 02 10 2023
accepted: 11 05 2024
medline: 28 5 2024
pubmed: 28 5 2024
entrez: 28 5 2024
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

To evaluate safety, feasibility, and acceptability of a telemedicine medical abortion service without pre-treatment in-person tests in Ukraine, Uzbekistan, and Azerbaijan. We conducted an open-label, prospective, observational clinical study at five clinics in the three countries. Interested and eligible participants scheduled a telemedicine consultation with a study provider by phone or video. Medical abortion pills could be obtained by mail or courier or picked up at the study clinic or a pharmacy. Study providers contacted participants 1 week after mifepristone ingestion to assess abortion outcomes based on symptoms, and 3 weeks later to review the result of an at-home, high-sensitivity, urine pregnancy test. Participants were referred to in-person visit based on symptoms, urine pregnancy test results, or initiative by the participant. In all, 300 women participated in the study. Almost all participants received medical abortion medications the same day as their first contact with the study clinic, and the majority (n = 297, 99.0%) did not experience any problems receiving them. All except two women (0.67%) followed provider instructions on administration of medications. The majority of participants had a complete abortion without a procedure (Ukraine: n = 115, 95.8%; Uzbekistan: n = 127, 97.7%; Azerbaijan: n = 49, 98.0%), few had in-person visits (Ukraine: n = 30, 25.0%; Uzbekistan: n = 3, 2.3%; Azerbaijan: n = 4, 8.0%), and most were very satisfied or satisfied with the service (Ukraine: n = 116, 96%; Uzbekistan: n = 128, 98%; Azerbaijan: n = 45, 90%). No serious adverse events occurred. Telemedicine medical abortion using the no-test protocol is safe, feasible and acceptable for women in Ukraine, Uzbekistan, and Azerbaijan.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38803127
doi: 10.1002/ijgo.15708
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Informations de copyright

© 2024 International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics.

Références

Hussein J. COVID‐19: what implications for sexual and reproductive health and rights globally? Sex Reprod Health Matters. 2020;28:1746065.
Moreau C, Shankar M, Glasier A, Cameron S, Gemzell‐Danielsson K. Abortion regulation in Europe in the era of COVID‐19: a spectrum of policy responses. BMJ Sex Reprod Health. 2021;47(4):e14.
Erlank CP, Lord J, Church K. Acceptability of no‐test medical abortion provided via telemedicine during Covid‐19: analysis of patient‐reported outcomes. BMJ Sex Reprod Health. 2021;47(4):261‐268.
Beardsworth KM, Doshi U, Raymond E, Baldwin M. Miles and days until medical abortion via TelAbortion versus clinic in Oregon and Washington, USA. BMJ Sex Reprod Health. 2022;48(e1):e38‐e43.
Hyland P, Raymond EG, Chong E. A direct‐to‐patient telemedicine abortion service in Australia: retrospective analysis of the first 18 months. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2018;58(3):335‐340.
Raymond E, Chong E, Winikoff B, et al. TelAbortion: evaluation of a direct to patient telemedicine abortion service in the United States. Contraception. 2019;100:173‐177.
Chong E, Shochet T, Raymond E, et al. Expansion of a direct‐to‐patient telemedicine abortion service in the United States and experience during the COVID‐19 pandemic. Contraception. 2021;104(1):43‐48.
Perriera LK, Reeves MF, Chen BA, Hohmann HL, Hayes J, Creinin MD. Feasibility of telephone follow‐up after medical abortion. Contraception. 2010;81:143‐149.
World Health Organization. Abortion Care Guideline. World Health Organization; 2022.
Raymond EG, Grossman D, Mark A, et al. Commentary: No‐test medication abortion: a sample protocol for increasing access during a pandemic and beyond. Contraception. 2020;101:361‐366.
Tschann M, Ly ES, Hilliard S, Lange HLH. Changes to medication abortion clinical practices in response to the COVID‐19 pandemic. Contraception. 2021;104(1):77‐81.
Kerestes C, Murayama S, Tyson J, et al. Provision of medication abortion in Hawai‘i during COVID‐19: practical experience with multiple care delivery models. Contraception. 2021;104(1):49‐53.
Aiken A, Lohr PA, Lord J, Ghosh N, Starling J. Effectiveness, safety and acceptability of no‐test medical abortion (termination of pregnancy) provided via telemedicine: a national cohort study. BJOG. 2021;128(9):1464‐1474.
Anger A, Raymond E, Grant M, et al. Clinical and service delivery implications of omitting ultrasound before medication abortion provided via direct‐to‐patient telemedicine and mail in the U.S. Contraception. 2021;104(6):659‐665.
Endler M, Lavelanet A, Cleeve A, Ganatra B, Gomperts R, Gemzell‐Danielsson R. Telemedicine for medical abortion: a systematic review. BJOG. 2019;126(9):1094‐1102.
Comendant R, Cook C, Hodorogea S, Sagaidac I, Bubulici C, Platais I. Medical abortion via telemedicine for women and adolescents: experience from Moldova. Reprod Female Child Health. 2022;1:1‐8.
Tsereteli N, Mamatsashvili L, Tsertsvadze G, Tsereteli T, Platais I. Telemedicine medical abortion service in Georgia: an evaluation of a strategy with reduced number of in‐clinic visits. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2023;28(2):141‐146.
Gambir K, Kim C, Necastro KA, Ganatra B, Ngo TD, Cochrane Fertility Regulation Group. Self‐administered versus provider‐administered medical abortion. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020;3(3):CD013181.
Raymond E, Anger H, Chong E, et al. “False positive” urine pregnancy test results after successful medication abortion. Contraception. 2021;103(6):400‐403.
Boydell N, Reynolds‐Wright J, Cameron S, Harden J. Women's experiences of a telemedicine abortion service (up to 12 weeks) implemented during the coronavirus (COVID‐19) pandemic: a qualitative evaluation. BJOG. 2021;128(11):1752‐1761.
Peña M, Flores K, Ponce M, et al. Telemedicine for medical abortion service provision in Mexico: a safety, feasibility, and acceptability study. Contraception. 2022;114:67‐73.
Reynolds‐Wright JJ, Johnstone A, McCabe K, Evans E, Cameron S. Telemedicine medical abortion at home under 12 weeks' gestation: a prospective observational cohort study during the COVID‐19 pandemic. BMJ Sex Reprod Health. 2021;47(4):246‐251.

Auteurs

Tamar Tsereteli (T)

Gynuity Health Projects, New York, New York, USA.

Ingrida Platais (I)

Gynuity Health Projects, New York, New York, USA.
New York University Grossman School of Medicine, New York, New York, USA.

Mahlet Maru (M)

Gynuity Health Projects, New York, New York, USA.

Galyna Maystruk (G)

Charitable Foundation Women Health and Family Planning, Kyiv, Ukraine.

Dilfuza Kurbanbekova (D)

Women's Wellness Center, Tashkent, Uzbekistan.

Gulnara Rzayeva (G)

Scientific-Research Institute of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Baku, Azerbaijan.

Beverly Winikoff (B)

Gynuity Health Projects, New York, New York, USA.

Classifications MeSH