Advancing New Standards in Reproductive Health (ANSIRH), Bixby Center for Global Reproductive Health, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, Oakland, California.
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, Washington, District of Columbia.
Womens Health Issues. 2020 Nov-Dec;30(6):446-452. doi: 10.1016/j.whi.2020.08.002. Epub 2020 Sep 19.
Obstetrician-gynecologists (ob-gyns) play a critical role in improving access to timely abortion care. This cross-sectional study estimates the proportion of ob-gyns providing abortion referral in the prior year and identifies predictors of direct (facilitated) referral compared with indirect referral (providing contact information).
In 2016-2017, we invited a national sample of 2,500 ob-gyns to complete a survey. We restricted the final sample of 1,280 respondents (52% response rate) to participants who had abortion-seeking patients in the last 12 months (n = 868, 68% of the sample). We calculated descriptive statistics by referral type and conducted logistic regression analyses to examine associations between physician and practice setting characteristics and abortion referral type (direct vs. indirect).
Eighty-eight percent of ob-gyns provided abortion referral (479 [55%] indirect referrals; 287 [33%] direct referrals). Abortion provision in the prior year (adjusted odds ratio, 2.82; 95% confidence interval, 1.80-4.42) was a significant predictor of direct referrals. Compared with ob-gyns practicing in the Northeast, ob-gyns in the South had lower odds of direct referrals (adjusted odds ratio, 0.39; 95% confidence interval, 0.24-0.62), whereas those in the West had higher odds (adjusted odds ratio, 1.91; 95% confidence interval, 1.14-3.23). Ob-gyns providing direct referrals were more likely to practice within 25 miles of an abortion facility compared with those who provided indirect referrals (25% vs. 5%, respectively; p < .001).
Although the majority of ob-gyns refer patients for abortion care, most offer indirect referrals, only providing contact information for an abortion provider. Ob-gyns should facilitate referrals as access becomes more constrained, especially in regions where abortion facilities are limited.
妇产科医生在改善及时获得堕胎护理的机会方面发挥着关键作用。这项横断面研究估计了在过去一年中提供堕胎转介的妇产科医生的比例,并确定了与间接转介(提供联络信息)相比直接(促进)转介的预测因素。
在 2016-2017 年,我们邀请了全国范围内的 2500 名妇产科医生参加一项调查。我们将最终的 1280 名应答者样本(52%的应答率)限制在过去 12 个月中有寻求堕胎的患者的参与者(n=868,占样本的 68%)。我们按转介类型计算了描述性统计数据,并进行了逻辑回归分析,以检查医生和实践环境特征与堕胎转介类型(直接与间接)之间的关联。
88%的妇产科医生提供堕胎转介(479 例[55%]间接转介;287 例[33%]直接转介)。过去一年中的堕胎服务提供情况(调整后的优势比,2.82;95%置信区间,1.80-4.42)是直接转介的显著预测因素。与在东北部执业的妇产科医生相比,在南部执业的妇产科医生直接转介的可能性较低(调整后的优势比,0.39;95%置信区间,0.24-0.62),而在西部执业的妇产科医生则更高(调整后的优势比,1.91;95%置信区间,1.14-3.23)。与提供间接转介的医生相比,提供直接转介的医生更有可能在距离堕胎设施 25 英里内执业(分别为 25%和 5%;p<.001)。
尽管大多数妇产科医生都为堕胎护理转介患者,但大多数都提供间接转介,只提供堕胎提供者的联系信息。随着获得机会的限制越来越大,特别是在堕胎设施有限的地区,妇产科医生应该促进转介。