Miani Céline, Niemann Jana
AG Epidemiologie und International Public Health, Fakultät für Gesundheitswissenschaften, Universität Bielefeld, Universität Str. 25, 33615, Bielefeld, Deutschland.
Institut für Medizinische Soziologie (IMS), Profilzentrum für Gesundheitswissenschaften, Martin-Luther-Universität Halle-Wittenberg, Halle (Saale), Deutschland.
Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz. 2025 Jan;68(1):53-61. doi: 10.1007/s00103-024-03995-2. Epub 2024 Dec 11.
The COVID-19 pandemic has had a drastic impact on healthcare systems. They had to react, adapt and innovate in order to build resilience, that is maintain healthcare access and health equity. For example, access to abortion services during the pandemic was increasingly facilitated through "Telehealth for Early Medical Abortion" (TEMA).This narrative review article compares Germany, France and Great Britain in terms of abortion numbers, methods and settings from 2018 to 2023. Changes in the availability of services and legislation during the pandemic are presented, and the differences between the countries, as well as various innovation factors, are discussed. We used national statistics and conducted a literature and online search (Rapid Review).In the three countries, there are differences in abortion rates, the share of medical abortions and the impact of the pandemic. In France and Great Britain, where medical abortion is the main method of abortion and where abortion care was more accessible before the pandemic than in Germany, a series of innovations were officially introduced to facilitate access during the pandemic. They included teleconsultations and the mailing of abortion medication. Most changes have been sustained since then, contributing to addressing historic and systemic health inequities in terms of access. In Germany, innovations during the pandemic have been crafted mainly by civil society organisations, offering for the first time teleabortion services.The COVID-19 pandemic provoked or accelerated innovation in terms of abortion care in France, Germany and Great Britain. The sustainability and scaling-up of those innovations remain fragile, especially in Germany, where the disruptive approach of civil society organisations has not yet found its way into mainstream healthcare services.
新冠疫情对医疗系统产生了巨大影响。为了增强恢复力,即维持医疗服务可及性和健康公平性,医疗系统必须做出反应、进行调整和创新。例如,在疫情期间,通过“早期药物流产远程医疗”(TEMA),流产服务的可及性得到了越来越多的便利。这篇叙述性综述文章比较了2018年至2023年德国、法国和英国在流产数量、方法和环境方面的情况。介绍了疫情期间服务可及性和立法的变化,并讨论了各国之间的差异以及各种创新因素。我们使用了国家统计数据,并进行了文献和在线搜索(快速综述)。在这三个国家,流产率以及药物流产的比例和疫情的影响存在差异。在法国和英国,药物流产是主要的流产方式,且在疫情之前流产护理比德国更容易获得,为了在疫情期间便利服务可及性,官方引入了一系列创新措施。这些措施包括远程会诊和邮寄流产药物。从那时起,大多数变化得以持续,有助于解决在可及性方面的历史性和系统性健康不平等问题。在德国,疫情期间的创新主要由民间社会组织推动,首次提供了远程流产服务。新冠疫情在法国、德国和英国引发或加速了流产护理方面的创新。这些创新的可持续性和扩大规模仍然较为脆弱,尤其是在德国,民间社会组织的突破性做法尚未融入主流医疗服务。