Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T20:27:15.094Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 10 - Starting and Optimizing an Academic Abortion Service

from Section II - Integration of Abortion into Graduate Medical Education

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 July 2021

By
Karen Meckstroth
Edited by
Uta Landy ,
Philip D Darney  and
Jody Steinauer
Uta Landy
Affiliation:
University of California, San Francisco
Philip D Darney
Affiliation:
University of California, San Francisco
Jody Steinauer
Affiliation:
University of California, San Francisco
Get access

Summary

Abortion is generally a simple, safe procedure; providing it in a general academic obgyn setting poses unique opportunities and challenges for patients, providers and learners. This chapter reviews options and considerations and provides resources for starting and improving a teaching abortion service, including guidelines, patient education, and important relationships to consider. The family planning teaching services at UCSF and UCSF’s Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital are presented as two different service and teaching examples. Abortion services can raise challenges with policies, insurance, scheduling, clinic safety and staff refusals to take care of patients. Patients face their own challenges to seek care, such as stigma, travel, poverty, and intense emotions, and many have experienced domestic violence and sexual assault. Residents and students need to address their personal emotions in addition to learning clinical skills. Providing patient-centered abortion services, particularly for patients who cannot be seen elsewhere, is an issue of equity that makes it highly valuable learning opportunity.

Keywords

health servicesequityabortion careabortioncontraceptionpatient educationinsuranceconscientious refusal
Type
Chapter
Information
Advancing Women's Health Through Medical Education
A Systems Approach in Family Planning and Abortion
 , pp. 110 - 122
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Jerman, JJ, Rachel, K, Onda, T. Characteristics of U.S. Abortion Patients in 2014 and Changes since 2008. New York: Guttmacher Institute; 2016. www.guttmacher.org/report/characteristics-us-abortion-patients-2014Google Scholar
Arthur, JH, Fiala, C. The FSRH guideline on conscientious objection disrespects patient rights and endangers their health. BMJ Sex Reprod Health. 2018;44(2):145.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Foster, DG. The TurnAway Study. San Francisco: Advancing Standards in Reproductive Health, University of California, San Francisco; 2019. www.ansirh.org/research/turnaway-studyGoogle Scholar
Induced abortion in the United States. Fact sheet. 2019. www.guttmacher.org/fact-sheet/induced-abortion-united-states. Accessed April 7, 2020.Google Scholar
Clinical Policy Guidelines for Abortion Care. Washington, DC: National Abortion Federation; 2018.Google Scholar
Levy, BS, Ness, DL, Weinberger, SE. Consensus guidelines for facilities performing outpatient procedures: evidence over ideology. Obstet Gynecol. 2019;133(2):255–260.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mercier, RJ, Buchbinder, M, Bryant, A. TRAP laws and the invisible labor of US abortion providers. Crit Public Health. 2016;26(1):77–87.Google Scholar
Guiahi, M, Teal, S, Kenton, K, DeCesare, J, Steinauer, J. Family planning training at Catholic and other religious hospitals: a national survey. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2020; 222(3):273.e1–273.e9.Google Scholar
Upadhyay, UD, Grossman, D. Telemedicine for medication abortion. Contraception. 2019;100(5):351–353.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Raymond, E, Chong, E, Winikoff, B, et al. TelAbortion: evaluation of a direct to patient telemedicine abortion service in the United States. Contraception. 2019;100(3):173–177.Google Scholar
Society of Family Planning. Clinical Guidance.Google Scholar
National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Abortion care. In National Institute for Health and Care Excellence: Clinical Guidelines. London: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence; 2019.Google Scholar
Vayssiere, C, Gaudineau, A, Attali, L, et al. Elective abortion: clinical practice guidelines from the French College of Gynecologists and Obstetricians (CNGOF). Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2018;222:95–101.Google Scholar
Zeldovich, V, Rocca, CH, Langton, C, Landy, U, Ly, ES, Freedman, LR. Abortion policies in United States teaching hospitals: formal and informal parameters beyond the law. Obstet Gynecol. 2020;135(6):1296–1305.Google Scholar
ACOG Obstetric Care Consensus No. 3 summary: periviable birth. Obstet Gynecol. 2015;126(5):1123–1125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ACOG Practice Bulletin No. 135: second-trimester abortion. Obstet Gynecol. 2013;121(6):1394–1406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, KO, Jones, HE, Lavelanet, A, et al. First-trimester aspiration abortion practices: a survey of United States abortion providers. Contraception. 2019;99(1):10–15.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Practice guidelines for moderate procedural sedation and analgesia 2018: a report by the American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on Moderate Procedural Sedation and Analgesia, the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons, American College of Radiology, American Dental Association, American Society of Dentist Anesthesiologists, and Society of Interventional Radiology. Anesthesiology. 2018;128(3):437–479.Google Scholar
Aksel, S, Lang, L, Steinauer, JE, et al. Safety of deep sedation without intubation for second-trimester dilation and evacuation. Obstet Gynecol. 2018;132(1):171–178.Google Scholar
Roberts, SC, Gould, H, Kimport, K, Weitz, TA, Foster Greene, D. Out-of-pocket costs and insurance coverage for abortion in the United States. Womens Health Issues. 2014;24(2):e211–218.Google Scholar
Mainey, L, Taylor, A, Baird, K, O’Mullan, C. Disclosure of domestic violence and sexual assault within the context of abortion: meta-ethnographic synthesis of qualitative studies protocol. Syst Rev. 2017;6(1):257.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chor, J, Lyman, P, Ruth, J, Patel, A, Gilliam, M. Integrating doulas into first-trimester abortion care: physician, clinic staff, and doula experiences. J Midwifery Womens Health. 2018;63(1):53–57.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×