Telehealth Medication Abortion in Primary Care: A Comparison to Usual in-Clinic Care.

INTRODUCTION

Providing abortion in primary care expands access and alleviates delays. The 2020 COVID-19 public health emergency (PHE) led to the expansion of telehealth, including medication abortion (MAB). This study evaluates the accessibility of novel telehealth MAB (teleMAB) initiated during the PHE, with the lifting of mifepristone restrictions, compared with traditional in-clinic MAB offered before the PHE at a Massachusetts safety-net primary care organization.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective electronic medical record review of 267 MABs. We describe sociodemographic, care access, and complete abortion characteristics and compare differences between teleMAB and in-clinic MABs using Chi-squared test, fisher's exact test, independent test, and Wilcoxon rank sum. We conducted logistic regression to examine differences in time to care (6 days or less vs 7 days or more).

RESULTS

184 MABs were eligible for analysis (137 in-clinic, 47 teleMAB). Patients were not significantly more likely to receive teleMAB versus in-clinic MAB based on race, ethnicity, language, or payment. Completed abortion did not significantly differ between groups (). Patients received care more quickly when accessing teleMAB compared with usual in-clinic MAB (median 3 days, range 0 to 20 vs median 6 days, range 0 to 32; < .001). TeleMAB patients had 2.29 times the odds of having their abortion appointment within 6 days compared with in-clinic (95% CI: 1.13, 4.86).

CONCLUSION

TeleMAB in primary care is as effective, timelier, and potentially more accessible than in-clinic MAB when in-person mifepristone regulations were enforced. TeleMAB is feasible and can promote patient-centered and timely access to abortion care.