ArticleDigital health
Patient and health professional attitudes towards the use of telemedicine for abortion care in Britain: Findings from the SACHA study.
Article in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- What guidance exists to support remote consultations in sexual and reproductive health services? A review of the policy and practice literature.Sexually transmitted infections · 2025Review
- Implementation of Telemedicine for Patients With Dementia and Their Caregivers: Scoping Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Use of telemedicine in abortion care is safe and effective. Patient satisfaction with telemedically supported abortion is high, but as use expands in Britain, little is known about patients' or health professionals' views on how it is best used. We sought the views of both groups on telemedicine's role in abortion provision and how its use might be optimised. Methods: We administered a structured survey with an additional free-text response option to a range of health professionals from services identified via clustered random sampling. We conducted semi-structured interviews with patients with recent experience of abortion, purposively sampled from abortion services. Participants were recruited from England, Scotland and Wales. We analysed qualitative data using thematic analysis alongside framework analysis. Results: Support for telemedicine was high among participants, which included 771 health professionals from a range of services and 48 patients. Among health professionals, 23% opposed the use of telemedicine in abortion provision. Opposition was highest among those uninvolved, or who did not feel skilled, in remote provision. Reported benefits included patient convenience and comfort. Patient concerns centred on adequate provision of emotional support. Participants made suggestions for augmenting and extending the use of telemedicine to meet some patients' needs, including combining telemedical consultation with in-person care and providing information and follow-up via digital methods. Conclusions: Acceptability of telemedically supported abortion, which offers logistical and emotional benefits to patients, is high in Britain. Novel ways of providing telemedical support should be explored to enhance remote abortion provision. In-person care should remain an option for patients.
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.