Purpose: To compare outcomes of early medical abortion with mifepristone and misoprostol in a family medicine setting and specialized reproductive health clinics. Methods: This study used data collected from a prospective, open-label, randomized trial of oral versus buccal misoprostol efficacy. A secondary analysis was performed, evaluating efficacy, acceptability, and interventions after medication at the family medicine site compared with the 6 specialized reproductive health sites. Results: Comparing data from patients in the family medicine setting (n = 116) to specialized reproductive health sites (n = 731) revealed no difference in overall efficacy (95.7% vs 93.4%; P = .351). The family medicine site used a second dose of misoprostol more frequently than the other sites (6.9% vs 2.5%; P = .018). In addition, uterine aspiration after medical abortion at the family medicine site was not used for "medically necessary" reasons whereas reproductive health clinics used it 2.6% of the time (marginally significant; P = .094). Patient satisfaction at family medicine sites was comparable to the other sites (91.2% vs 92.0%; P = .792). Conclusion: Medical abortion has similar efficacy and patient satisfaction when offered in a family medicine practice or at a reproductive health specialty clinic. These findings should reassure family physicians that medical abortion can be offered safely in their practices.
CITATION STYLE
Prine, L., Shannon, C., Gillespie, G., Crowden, W. A., Fortin, J., Howe, M., & Dzuba, I. (2010). Medical abortion: Outcomes in a family medicine setting. Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine, 23(4), 509–513. https://doi.org/10.3122/jabfm.2010.04.090229
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.