Trial reportBMC women's health2022
Evaluating women's acceptability of treatment of incomplete second trimester abortion using misoprostol provided by midwives compared with physicians: a mixed methods study.
Trial report in BMC women's health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03622073 (Safety, Effectiveness and Acceptability of Misoprostol When Administered by Midwives Versus Physicians for Management of Incomplete Mid Trimester Abortion in Uganda), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Safety, Effectiveness and Acceptability of Misoprostol When Administered by Midwives Versus Physicians for Management of Incomplete Mid Trimester Abortion in Uganda: a Randomized Controlled Equivalence Trial.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Scoping review of qualitative studies on family planning in Uganda.PLOS global public health · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundStudies evaluating task sharing in postabortion care have mainly focused on women in first trimester and many lack a qualitative component. We aimed to evaluate patient acceptability of treatment of incomplete second trimester abortion using misoprostol provided by midwives compared with physicians and also gained a deeper understanding of the patients' lived treatment experiences in Uganda.
methodsOur mixed methods study combined 1140 structured interview data from a randomized controlled equivalence trial and in-depth interviews (n = 28) among women managed with misoprostol for second trimester incomplete abortion at 14 public health facilities in Uganda. Acceptability, our main outcome, was measured at the 14-day follow-up visit using a structured questionnaire as a composite variable of: 1) treatment experience (as expected/ better than expected/ worse than expected), and 2) satisfaction - if patient would recommend the treatment to a friend or choose the method again. We used generalized mixed effects models to obtain the risk difference in acceptable post abortion care between midwife and physician groups. We used inductive content analysis for qualitative data.
resultsFrom 14th August 2018 to 16th November 2021, we assessed 7190 women for eligibility and randomized 1191 (593 to midwife and 598 to physician). We successfully followed up 1140 women and 1071 (94%) found the treatment acceptable. The adjusted risk difference was 1.2% (95% CI, - 1.2 to 3.6%) between the two groups, and within our predefined equivalence range of - 5 to + 5%. Treatment success and feeling calm and safe after treatment enhanced acceptability while experience of side effects and worrying bleeding patterns reduced satisfaction.
conclusionsMisoprostol treatment of uncomplicated second trimester incomplete abortion was equally and highly acceptable to women when care was provided by midwives compared with physicians. In settings that lack adequate staffing levels of physicians or where midwives are available to provide misoprostol, task sharing second trimester medical PAC with midwives increases patient's access to postabortion care services.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT03622073.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.