Sobel Lauren, Bernstein Madison, Arunkumar Namita, Fortin Jennifer, Fulcher Isabel, Hwang Youri, Goldberg Alisa B
Division of Family Planning, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Biology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, United States; Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States; Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts, Boston, MA, United States.
Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts, Boston, MA, United States.
Contraception. 2025 Mar;143:110732. doi: 10.1016/j.contraception.2024.110732. Epub 2024 Nov 5.
OBJECTIVE(S): To evaluate if the type of abortion patients prefer differs for those with a history of intimate partner violence (IPV) compared to those without a history of IPV.
We compared choice of medication versus procedural abortion between those with a history of lifetime IPV and those without a history of IPV among patients seeking abortion at 11 weeks' gestation or less. Secondarily, we compared preferred abortion characteristics and assessed reproductive autonomy. Individuals presenting for abortion care were recruited for an anonymous, cross-sectional survey study at Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts, Boston Health Center from September 2021 to August 2022. We required 336 subjects to detect a 20% difference in abortion method between those with a lifetime history of IPV and those without, with 80% power.
We enrolled 342 participants and excluded six with missing data. A total of 71 individuals (21%) reported a lifetime history of IPV. A majority of individuals with a lifetime history of IPV chose procedural abortion, although their abortion method choice did not differ significantly from individuals with no history of IPV (56.3% vs 47.2%, p = 0.244). Individuals with a lifetime IPV history used abortion funds more frequently than those without a history of lifetime IPV (8.5% vs 1.5%, p = 0.047). There was no statistical difference between individuals with and without a lifetime history of IPV regarding what individuals considered important for the type of abortion they chose or reproductive autonomy.
CONCLUSION(S): Access to procedural abortion services and abortion funds are important to meet the abortion needs of patients with a lifetime history of IPV.
Providing both medication and procedural abortion and creating a trauma-informed environment are central to supporting individuals with a history of IPV. Safeguarding abortion fund access is important individuals with a history of IPV.
评估有亲密伴侣暴力史（IPV）的堕胎患者与无IPV病史的患者相比，其更喜欢的堕胎类型是否存在差异。
我们比较了妊娠11周及以内寻求堕胎的患者中，有终身IPV病史者与无IPV病史者在药物流产与手术流产选择上的差异。其次，我们比较了偏好的堕胎特征并评估了生殖自主权。2021年9月至2022年8月期间，在马萨诸塞州计划生育联盟波士顿健康中心，为前来接受堕胎护理的个体开展了一项匿名横断面调查研究。我们需要336名受试者，以80%的检验效能检测出有终身IPV病史者与无此病史者在堕胎方式上20%的差异。
我们招募了342名参与者，排除了6名有缺失数据者。共有71人（21%）报告有终身IPV病史。大多数有终身IPV病史的个体选择手术流产，尽管他们的堕胎方式选择与无IPV病史的个体相比无显著差异（56.3%对47.2%，p = 0.244）。有终身IPV病史的个体比无终身IPV病史的个体更频繁地使用堕胎资金（8.5%对1.5%，p = 0.047）。在有和无终身IPV病史的个体中，对于他们所选择的堕胎类型或生殖自主权，人们认为重要的方面没有统计学差异。
获得手术流产服务和堕胎资金对于满足有终身IPV病史患者的堕胎需求很重要。
提供药物流产和手术流产服务以及营造一个了解创伤情况的环境对于支持有IPV病史的个体至关重要。保障有IPV病史的个体获得堕胎资金很重要。
