ArticleScientific reports2023
First trimester abortion protocols by facility type in Switzerland and potential barriers to accessing the service.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Simplified first-trimester abortion protocols are well established. However, data on the use of medical or surgical abortion protocols across Switzerland is lacking. We report protocol characteristics in abortion care for two different facility types, hospital vs private practices (office-based) in Switzerland. Furthermore, we investigate an association between protocol characteristics and the likelihood of following through with the abortion at the same facility. We also report abortion outcomes of an office-based cohort where doctors use simplified abortion protocols. This study consists of two parts. (i) Between April and July, 2019, we collected data regarding medical and surgical abortion protocols of institutions offering abortions, in a nationwide survey. We assessed whether the proportion of patients who followed through with the abortion (primary outcome) after first appointment was associated with predefined protocol characteristics, considered to complicate access to abortion services, using generalised estimating equations. (ii) We analysed abortion outcomes of six selected office-based facilities from January, 2008, to December, 2018, using simplified abortion protocols in accordance with the Worlds Health Organisation (WHO) guidelines. (i) We included a total of 39 institutions. Hospitals showed more protocol-based barriers to abortion access compared with office-based facilities. The odds of undergoing an abortion after the first appointment were increased using protocols with minimal barriers. Overall, office-based facilities applied higher gestational age limits, required fewer appointments, and administered mifepristone more often after the first visit than did hospitals. (ii) We included a total of 5274 patients with an incidence of complications requiring surgery of 2.5% in line with rates reported in published literature. Only a few hospitals provide abortion care with easy access to medical and surgical abortion, whereas most office-based facilities do. Access to abortion services is generally crucial, and should be provided in a single visit whenever clinically permissible.
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.