Suppr超能文献

2017年按州政策环境划分的诊所堕胎服务提供情况。

Abortion service delivery in clinics by state policy climate in 2017.

作者信息

Witwer Elizabeth, Jones Rachel K, Fuentes Liza, Castle S Kate

机构信息

Guttmacher Institute, 125 Maiden Lane, Seventh Floor, New York, NY 10038.

出版信息

Contracept X. 2020;2:100043. doi: 10.1016/j.conx.2020.100043. Epub 2020 Oct 16.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

The objective was to examine service delivery in clinics that provided abortions in 2017, including differences by abortion policy climate.

STUDY DESIGN

Using data from the Guttmacher Institute's 2017 Abortion Provider Census, we examine amount charged for abortion care, pregnancy gestation at which abortions were offered, number of days per week that clinics provided abortions and types of nonabortion services offered. Our analysis focuses on the 808 clinic facilities that provided 95% of abortions that year. Measures were calculated nationally and according to whether the clinic was in a state we categorized as hostile, middle ground or supportive of abortion rights.

RESULTS

In 2017, 64% of clinics offered abortion at 11 weeks pregnancy gestation, and 22% did so at 20 weeks gestation. Supportive states had a higher density of clinics that provide abortion for every measured gestation than hostile states. Clinics charged an average of $549 for a surgical abortion at 10 weeks and $551 for medication abortion. Some 46% of clinics in supportive states offered abortion care 5 or more days per week compared to 29% in hostile states. Most clinics offered standalone contraception and family planning (87%) and gynecological care (85%), but the proportion of clinics that provided these services was higher in supportive states (93% and 90%) than in hostile states (75% and 73%).

CONCLUSIONS

A substantial proportion of abortion facilities provide a range of other health care services. Aspects of service delivery, such as number of days abortions are provided, may vary according to abortion policy climate.

IMPLICATIONS STATEMENT

Onerous policies in states hostile to abortion rights may inhibit some facilities from providing abortion more days per week, and if so, could further burden patients obtaining abortion care in these states.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在调查2017年提供堕胎服务的诊所的服务提供情况,包括堕胎政策环境的差异。

研究设计

利用古特马赫研究所2017年堕胎服务提供者普查数据,我们调查了堕胎护理收费、提供堕胎服务时的妊娠周数、诊所每周提供堕胎服务的天数以及所提供的非堕胎服务类型。我们的分析重点是当年提供了95%堕胎服务的808家诊所设施。相关指标在全国范围内进行了计算,并根据诊所所在州被我们归类为对堕胎权利持敌对、中立或支持态度来进行计算。

结果

2017年,64%的诊所妊娠11周时提供堕胎服务,22%的诊所在妊娠20周时提供。与敌对州相比,支持堕胎权利的州在每个测量妊娠阶段提供堕胎服务的诊所密度更高。妊娠10周时,诊所进行手术堕胎的平均收费为549美元,药物堕胎为551美元。支持堕胎权利州约46%的诊所每周提供堕胎护理5天或更多天,而敌对州为29%。大多数诊所提供独立的避孕和计划生育服务(87%)以及妇科护理(85%),但提供这些服务的诊所比例在支持堕胎权利的州(93%和90%)高于敌对州(75%和73%)。

结论

相当一部分堕胎设施提供一系列其他医疗保健服务。服务提供的某些方面,如提供堕胎服务的天数,可能因堕胎政策环境而异。

启示声明

对堕胎权利持敌对态度的州实施的严苛政策可能会抑制一些设施每周提供更多天数的堕胎服务,如果是这样,可能会给这些州寻求堕胎护理的患者带来更大负担。

相似文献

1
Abortion service delivery in clinics by state policy climate in 2017.
Contracept X. 2020;2:100043. doi: 10.1016/j.conx.2020.100043. Epub 2020 Oct 16.
2
Differences in Abortion Service Delivery in Hostile, Middle-ground, and Supportive States in 2014.
Womens Health Issues. 2018 May-Jun;28(3):212-218. doi: 10.1016/j.whi.2017.12.003. Epub 2018 Jan 12.
3
Factors hindering access to abortion services.
Fam Plann Perspect. 1995 Mar-Apr;27(2):54-9, 87.
4
Freestanding abortion clinics: services, structure, fees.
Fam Plann Perspect. 1982 Sep-Oct;14(5):248-50, 253-6.
5
Providing controversial health care: abortion services since 1973.
Womens Health Issues. 1993 Fall;3(3):152-7. doi: 10.1016/s1049-3867(05)80249-x.
6
Abortion service provision in South Asia: A comparative study of four countries.
Contraception. 2020 Sep;102(3):210-219. doi: 10.1016/j.contraception.2020.05.015. Epub 2020 May 29.
7
Abortion services in the United States, 1987 and 1988.
Fam Plann Perspect. 1990 May-Jun;22(3):102-8, 142.
8
Abortion travel within the United States: An observational study of cross-state movement to obtain abortion care in 2017.
Lancet Reg Health Am. 2022 Mar 4;10:100214. doi: 10.1016/j.lana.2022.100214. eCollection 2022 Jun.
9
Abortion services in the United States, 1984 and 1985.
Fam Plann Perspect. 1987 Mar-Apr;19(2):63-70.
10
In the states.
Reprod Freedom News. 1994 Feb 25;3(4):5-8.

引用本文的文献

1
Making sense of the economics of abortion in the United States.
Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2024 Sep;56(3):199-210. doi: 10.1111/psrh.12288. Epub 2024 Nov 13.
2
Patient experiences using public and private insurance coverage for abortion in Illinois: Implementation successes and remaining gaps.
Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2024 Sep;56(3):269-281. doi: 10.1111/psrh.12259. Epub 2024 Apr 11.
3
Experiences of delay-causing obstacles and mental health at the time of abortion seeking.
Contracept X. 2024 Mar 6;6:100105. doi: 10.1016/j.conx.2024.100105. eCollection 2024.
5
Abortion patients' decision making about where to obtain out-of-state care following Texas' 2021 abortion ban.
Health Serv Res. 2024 Feb;59(1):e14226. doi: 10.1111/1475-6773.14226. Epub 2023 Sep 12.
6
Association Between Rates of Down Syndrome Diagnosis in States With vs Without 20-Week Abortion Bans From 2011 to 2018.
JAMA Netw Open. 2023 Mar 1;6(3):e233684. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.3684.
8
The economic context of pursuing online medication abortion in the United States.
SSM Qual Res Health. 2021 Dec;1. doi: 10.1016/j.ssmqr.2021.100003. Epub 2021 Aug 27.
10
The future of abortion is now: Mifepristone by mail and in-clinic abortion access in the United States.
Contraception. 2021 Jul;104(1):38-42. doi: 10.1016/j.contraception.2021.03.033. Epub 2021 Apr 17.

本文引用的文献

1
Care Churn - Why Keeping Clinic Doors Open Isn't Enough to Ensure Access to Abortion.
N Engl J Med. 2020 Aug 6;383(6):508-510. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp2013466.
2
Transgender abortion patients and the provision of transgender-specific care at non-hospital facilities that provide abortions.
Contracept X. 2020 Jan 18;2:100019. doi: 10.1016/j.conx.2020.100019. eCollection 2020.
3
COVID-19 Abortion Bans and Their Implications for Public Health.
Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2020 Jul;52(2):65-68. doi: 10.1363/psrh.12139. Epub 2020 Jun 18.
4
Commentary: No-test medication abortion: A sample protocol for increasing access during a pandemic and beyond.
Contraception. 2020 Jun;101(6):361-366. doi: 10.1016/j.contraception.2020.04.005. Epub 2020 Apr 16.
5
Challenges and strategies for contraceptive care in independent abortion clinics in the United States, 2017.
Sex Reprod Healthc. 2019 Oct;21:102-107. doi: 10.1016/j.srhc.2019.07.001. Epub 2019 Jul 15.
6
Predicted changes in abortion access and incidence in a post-Roe world.
Contraception. 2019 Nov;100(5):367-373. doi: 10.1016/j.contraception.2019.07.139. Epub 2019 Jul 31.
7
Distance Traveled to Obtain Clinical Abortion Care in the United States and Reasons for Clinic Choice.
J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2019 Dec;28(12):1623-1631. doi: 10.1089/jwh.2018.7496. Epub 2019 Jul 8.
8
Differences in Abortion Service Delivery in Hostile, Middle-ground, and Supportive States in 2014.
Womens Health Issues. 2018 May-Jun;28(3):212-218. doi: 10.1016/j.whi.2017.12.003. Epub 2018 Jan 12.
9
Barriers to Abortion Care and Their Consequences For Patients Traveling for Services: Qualitative Findings from Two States.
Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2017 Jun;49(2):95-102. doi: 10.1363/psrh.12024. Epub 2017 Apr 10.
10
TRAP laws and the invisible labor of US abortion providers.
Crit Public Health. 2016;26(1):77-87. doi: 10.1080/09581596.2015.1077205. Epub 2015 Aug 19.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验