TY - JOUR
T1 - Association of facility type with procedural-related morbidities and adverse events among patients undergoing induced abortions
AU - Roberts, Sarah C.M.
AU - Upadhyay, Ushma D.
AU - Liu, Guodong
AU - Kerns, Jennifer L.
AU - Ba, Djibril
AU - Beam, Nancy
AU - Leslie, Douglas L.
N1 - Funding Information:
Additional Contributions: We thank Bonnie Scott Jones, JD, for help understanding ASC laws, and Sara Daniel, MPH, and Beckie Kriz, RN, MS, for database preparation. The efforts of Mss Jones, Daniel, and Kriz also were supported by SFPRF10-10. All 3 worked at Advancing New Standards in Reproductive Health in the Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences at the University of California, San Francisco, during the study.
Funding Information:
Funding/Support: This study was supported by a grant from the Society of Family Planning Research Fund, SFPRF10-10.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2018 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
PY - 2018/6/26
Y1 - 2018/6/26
N2 - IMPORTANCE Multiple states have laws requiring abortion facilities to meet ambulatory surgery center (ASC) standards. There is limited evidence regarding abortion-related morbidities and adverse events following abortions performed at ASCs vs office-based settings. OBJECTIVE To compare abortion-related morbidities and adverse events at ASCs vs office-based settings. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Retrospective cohort study ofwomen with US private health insurance who underwent induced abortions in an ASC or office-based setting (January 1, 2011-December 31, 2014). Outcomes were abstracted from a large national private insurance claims database during the 6 weeks following the abortion (date of final follow-up, February 11, 2015). EXPOSURES Facility type for abortion (ASCs vs office-based settings, including facilities such as abortion clinics, nonspecialized clinics, and physician offices). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcomewas any abortion-related morbidity or adverse event (such as retained products of conception, abortion-related infection, hemorrhage, and uterine perforation) within 6 weeks after an abortion. Two secondary outcomes, both subsets of the primary outcome, were major abortion-related morbidities and adverse events (such as hemorrhages treated with a transfusion, missed ectopic pregnancies treated with surgery, and abortion-related infections that resulted in an overnight hospital admission) and abortion-related infections. RESULTS Among 49 287 women (mean age, 28 years [SD, 7.3]) who had 50 311 induced abortions, (23 891 [47%] first-trimester aspiration, 13 480 [27%] first-trimester medication, and 12 940 [26%] second trimester or later), 5660 abortions (11%) were performed in ASCs and 44 651 (89%) in office-based settings. Overall, 3.33%had an abortion-related morbidity or adverse event; 0.32%had a major abortion-related morbidity or adverse event; and 0.74% had an abortion-related infection. In adjusted analyses, there was no statistically significant difference between ASCs vs office-based settings, respectively, in the rates of abortion-related morbidities or adverse events (3.25%vs 3.33%, difference, -0.8%; 95%CI, -0.58%to 0.43%; adjusted OR, 0.97; 95%CI, 0.81-1.17), major morbidities or adverse events (0.26%vs 0.33%; difference, -0.06%; 95%CI, -0.18%to 0.06%; adjusted OR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.45-1.37), or infections (0.58%vs 0.77%; difference, -0.16%; 95%CI, -0.35%to 0.03%; adjusted OR, 0.75; 95%CI, 0.52-1.09). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Among women with private health insurance who had an induced abortion, performance of the abortion in an ambulatory surgical center compared with an office-based setting was not associated with a significant difference in abortion-related morbidities and adverse events. These findings, in addition to individual patient and individual facility factors, may inform decisions about the type of facility in which induced abortions are performed.
AB - IMPORTANCE Multiple states have laws requiring abortion facilities to meet ambulatory surgery center (ASC) standards. There is limited evidence regarding abortion-related morbidities and adverse events following abortions performed at ASCs vs office-based settings. OBJECTIVE To compare abortion-related morbidities and adverse events at ASCs vs office-based settings. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Retrospective cohort study ofwomen with US private health insurance who underwent induced abortions in an ASC or office-based setting (January 1, 2011-December 31, 2014). Outcomes were abstracted from a large national private insurance claims database during the 6 weeks following the abortion (date of final follow-up, February 11, 2015). EXPOSURES Facility type for abortion (ASCs vs office-based settings, including facilities such as abortion clinics, nonspecialized clinics, and physician offices). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcomewas any abortion-related morbidity or adverse event (such as retained products of conception, abortion-related infection, hemorrhage, and uterine perforation) within 6 weeks after an abortion. Two secondary outcomes, both subsets of the primary outcome, were major abortion-related morbidities and adverse events (such as hemorrhages treated with a transfusion, missed ectopic pregnancies treated with surgery, and abortion-related infections that resulted in an overnight hospital admission) and abortion-related infections. RESULTS Among 49 287 women (mean age, 28 years [SD, 7.3]) who had 50 311 induced abortions, (23 891 [47%] first-trimester aspiration, 13 480 [27%] first-trimester medication, and 12 940 [26%] second trimester or later), 5660 abortions (11%) were performed in ASCs and 44 651 (89%) in office-based settings. Overall, 3.33%had an abortion-related morbidity or adverse event; 0.32%had a major abortion-related morbidity or adverse event; and 0.74% had an abortion-related infection. In adjusted analyses, there was no statistically significant difference between ASCs vs office-based settings, respectively, in the rates of abortion-related morbidities or adverse events (3.25%vs 3.33%, difference, -0.8%; 95%CI, -0.58%to 0.43%; adjusted OR, 0.97; 95%CI, 0.81-1.17), major morbidities or adverse events (0.26%vs 0.33%; difference, -0.06%; 95%CI, -0.18%to 0.06%; adjusted OR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.45-1.37), or infections (0.58%vs 0.77%; difference, -0.16%; 95%CI, -0.35%to 0.03%; adjusted OR, 0.75; 95%CI, 0.52-1.09). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Among women with private health insurance who had an induced abortion, performance of the abortion in an ambulatory surgical center compared with an office-based setting was not associated with a significant difference in abortion-related morbidities and adverse events. These findings, in addition to individual patient and individual facility factors, may inform decisions about the type of facility in which induced abortions are performed.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85049392308&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85049392308&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1001/jama.2018.7675
DO - 10.1001/jama.2018.7675
M3 - Article
C2 - 29946727
AN - SCOPUS:85049392308
SN - 0002-9955
VL - 319
SP - 2497
EP - 2506
JO - JAMA - Journal of the American Medical Association
JF - JAMA - Journal of the American Medical Association
IS - 24
ER -