| Literature DB >> 27165519 |
Kirti Iyengar1,2, Sharad D Iyengar3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Abortion services were legalized in India in 1972, however, the access to safe abortion services is restricted, especially in rural areas. In 2002, medical abortion using mifepristone- misoprostol was approved for termination of pregnancy, however, its use has been limited in primary care settings.Entities:
Keywords: India; Medical abortion; Mifepristone; Primary care settings; Safe abortion
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27165519 PMCID: PMC4863363 DOI: 10.1186/s12978-016-0157-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Reprod Health ISSN: 1742-4755 Impact factor: 3.223
Characteristics of women with unwanted pregnancies (n = 9076)
| Residence | ||
| • Rural | 9076 | 100 % |
| Marital status | ||
| • Married | 8926 | 98 % |
| • Unmarried/widow/separated | 150 | 2 % |
| Caste | ||
| • Scheduled caste/tribe | 5945 | 66 % |
| • Other | 3131 | 34 % |
| Number of children | ||
| • 0 | 481 | 5 % |
| • 1–2 | 3439 | 38 % |
| • 3–4 | 4022 | 44 % |
| • 5 or above | 1134 | 12 % |
| Prior induced abortions | ||
| • Yes | 1821 | 20 % |
| • No | 7255 | 80 % |
| Prior use of contraceptives | ||
| • Yes | 1294 | 14 % |
| Type of contraceptive used in the past | ||
| • Oral pills | 730 | 7.9 % |
| • Condom | 548 | 5.9 % |
| • Copper-T | 598 | 6.4 % |
| • DMPA | 287 | 3.1 % |
| Gestational age in weeks ( | ||
| • Upto 7 | 2415 | 28.1 % |
| • 8–9 | 2871 | 32.7 % |
| • 10–12 | 2082 | 23.7 % |
| • 13 & above | 1100 | 12.5 % |
| • Not recordeda | 119 | 1.4 % |
| Person accompanying | ||
| • No one | 3007 | 33.1 % |
| • Husband | 2886 | 31.8 % |
| • Family member other than husband | 2266 | 25.0 % |
| • Health volunteer | 515 | 5.7 % |
| • Neighbour/friend | 402 | 4.4 % |
| Prior attempts of abortion | ||
| • Any prior attempts of abortion (some women tried more than one method) | 1129 | 12.4 % |
| ○ Tablets from chemist shop | 883 | 10.1 % |
| ○ Decoction b | 229 | 2.6 % |
a Some women who arrived on a day when doctor was not available, did not undergo bimanual examination on the day of their first visit, and did not return to meet the doctor
b Decoctions are usually made through boiling of some herbs
Fig. 1Prior attempts of abortion and gestational age
Availability of communication facilities and informants
| ( | |
|---|---|
| Availability of phone | |
| • Woman | 456 (36.9 %) |
| • Husband | 550 (44.5 %) |
| • Other | 34 (2.8 %) |
| • None | 195 (15.8 %) |
| Vehicle available at home | |
| • Four wheeler | 19 (1.5 %) |
| • Two wheeler | 397 (32.1 %) |
| • No vehicle/only bicycle | 796 (64.5 %) |
| • NR | 23 (1.9 %) |
| Who are aware that she is undergoing abortion | |
| • Husband | 1175 (95.1 %) |
| • Anyone else other than husband | |
| ○ Relatives from husband family | 232 (18.8 %) |
| ○ Relatives from natal family | 83 (6.7 %) |
| ○ Neighbour/other | 66 (5.3 %) |
Fig. 2Reasons for not providing abortion service (n = 3284)
Fig. 3Type of abortion service provided at ARTH health centres (2001–2014, n = 6373)
Follow-up rates after abortion, 2001–2012 (n = 3868)a
| 2001–2003 ( | 2004–2006 ( | 2007–2009 ( | 2010–2012b ( | Total ( | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Women who returned for follow-up | 234 | 350 | 597 | 818 | 1999 |
| % MTPs that were medical abortions | 2.9 % | 28.9 % | 53.4 % | 83.8 % | 52.6 % |
| % follow-up | 38.2 % | 39.0 % | 47.2 % | 74.8 % | 51.7 % |
a The data is presented for two clinics, where records of follow-up are maintained
b The data is presented up to June 2012
Fig. 4Monthly variations in total caseloads of ARTH clinics (2001-2012)
Fig. 5Proportion of women using a contracetive after abortion
Fig 6Trends in types of postabortion contraceptives adopted (2001–2012, n = 4247)
Comparison of women coming for repeat abortion with those coming for the first time
| Repeat abortion seekers ( | First time abortion seekers ( | |
|---|---|---|
| Number of children | ||
| • 0–2 children | 534 (29.3 %) | 3386 (46.7 %) |
| • 3 or more children | 1287 (70.7 %) | 3869 (53.3 %) |
| Prior use of contraceptives | ||
| • Yes | 560 (30.8 %) | 734 (10.1 %) |
| • No | 1261 (69.2 %) | 6521 (89.9 %) |
Fig 7Proportion of abortion seekers who had repeat abortions