Literature DB >> 12667113

Pharmacoeconomics of medical abortion: a review of cost in the United States, Europe and Asia.

Amitasrigowri Murthy1, Mitchell D Creinin.   

Abstract

Procedures for the termination of pregnancy have existed for many years. Vacuum aspiration, otherwise referred to as 'surgical' abortion, is a very common and safe procedure. Its efficacy and acceptability has been established and its complication rate is low. Medical abortion is a much more recent phenomenon. It is defined as early pregnancy termination with the use of abortion inducing medications, without surgery [1]. In contrast to surgical abortion, medical abortion is not as routinely offered, nor are many providers comfortable with its use. Medical abortion regimens currently available throughout the world include mifepristone (Mifeprex trade mark, Aventis Pharma AG) and a prostaglandin analogue (usually misoprostol), methotrexate and misoprostol and misoprostol (Cytotec trade mark, CD Searle & Co.) alone. In the US, minimal information exists directly comparing medical to surgical abortion. Most abortion surveillance data was collected by the Centers for Disease Control prior to the approval of mifepristone. In contrast, there is over a decade's worth of experience from Europe with both the use and provision of medical abortion. A complete review of these issues must include background information on the history and incidence of abortion, who chooses to get an abortion, who provides that service and at what cost. The cost issue is discussed using three different viewpoints: cost to the patient, cost to the provider, cost to society - mainly in the form of government expenditure and savings. Following the cost analysis, there is a summary of relevant information from countries in Europe, primarily the UK, France, Sweden and countries in Asia, mainly China and India.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12667113     DOI: 10.1517/14656566.4.4.503

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Expert Opin Pharmacother        ISSN: 1465-6566            Impact factor:   3.889


  4 in total

1.  Trends in inequalities in induced abortion according to educational level among urban women.

Authors:  Gloria Pérez; Irene García-Subirats; Maica Rodríguez-Sanz; Elia Díez; Carme Borrell
Journal:  J Urban Health       Date:  2010-03-13       Impact factor: 3.671

2.  Socioeconomic inequalities in unintended pregnancy and abortion decision.

Authors:  Laia Font-Ribera; Glòria Pérez; Joaquín Salvador; Carme Borrell
Journal:  J Urban Health       Date:  2007-11-24       Impact factor: 3.671

3.  The macroeconomics of abortion: A scoping review and analysis of the costs and outcomes.

Authors:  Yana van der Meulen Rodgers; Ernestina Coast; Samantha R Lattof; Cheri Poss; Brittany Moore
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-05-06       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 4.  The microeconomics of abortion: A scoping review and analysis of the economic consequences for abortion care-seekers.

Authors:  Ernestina Coast; Samantha R Lattof; Yana van der Meulen Rodgers; Brittany Moore; Cheri Poss
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-06-09       Impact factor: 3.240

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.