Danielle Newton1, Chris Bayly2, Kathleen McNamee3, Marie Bismark4, Annarella Hardiman5, Amy Webster6, Louise Keogh1. 1. Gender and Women's Health, Centre for Health Equity, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 2. The Royal Women's Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 3. Family Planning Victoria & Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 4. Centre for Health Policy, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 5. Pregnancy Advisory Service, The Royal Women's Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. 6. Women's Health Victoria, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The introduction to Australia of modern medical abortion methods, which require less specialist expertise and equipment than the more traditional surgical methods, have brought an as yet unrealised potential to improve access to abortion services. AIMS: To investigate the potential for expanding the role of general practice in the provision of medical abortion in Victoria. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In 2015, in-depth interviews were conducted with 19 experts in abortion service provision in Victoria. A semi-structured interview schedule was used to guide the interviews. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and transcripts analysed thematically. RESULTS: Participants were largely very supportive of the provision of early medical abortion in general practice as a way of increasing abortion access for women, particularly in rural and regional communities. Access to abortion was seen as an essential component of women's comprehensive health care and therefore general practitioners (GPs) were perceived as ideally placed to provide this service. However, this would require development and implementation of new service models, careful consideration of GP and nurse roles, strengthening of partnerships with other health professionals and services in the community, and enhanced training, support and mentoring for clinicians. CONCLUSION: The application of these findings by relevant health services and agencies has the potential to increase provision of medical abortion services in general practice settings, better meeting the health-care needs of women seeking this service.
BACKGROUND: The introduction to Australia of modern medical abortion methods, which require less specialist expertise and equipment than the more traditional surgical methods, have brought an as yet unrealised potential to improve access to abortion services. AIMS: To investigate the potential for expanding the role of general practice in the provision of medical abortion in Victoria. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In 2015, in-depth interviews were conducted with 19 experts in abortion service provision in Victoria. A semi-structured interview schedule was used to guide the interviews. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and transcripts analysed thematically. RESULTS:Participants were largely very supportive of the provision of early medical abortion in general practice as a way of increasing abortion access for women, particularly in rural and regional communities. Access to abortion was seen as an essential component of women's comprehensive health care and therefore general practitioners (GPs) were perceived as ideally placed to provide this service. However, this would require development and implementation of new service models, careful consideration of GP and nurse roles, strengthening of partnerships with other health professionals and services in the community, and enhanced training, support and mentoring for clinicians. CONCLUSION: The application of these findings by relevant health services and agencies has the potential to increase provision of medical abortion services in general practice settings, better meeting the health-care needs of women seeking this service.
Authors: Sarah Munro; Edith Guilbert; Marie-Soleil Wagner; Elizabeth S Wilcox; Courtney Devane; Sheila Dunn; Melissa Brooks; Judith A Soon; Megan Mills; Genevieve Leduc-Robert; Kate Wahl; Erik Zannier; Wendy V Norman Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2020-09 Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Angela J Dawson; Rachel Nicolls; Deborah Bateson; Anna Doab; Jane Estoesta; Ann Brassil; Elizabeth A Sullivan Journal: Reprod Health Date: 2017-03-14 Impact factor: 3.223
Authors: Wendy V Norman; Sarah Munro; Melissa Brooks; Courtney Devane; Edith Guilbert; Regina Renner; Tamil Kendall; Judith A Soon; Ashley Waddington; Marie-Soleil Wagner; Sheila Dunn Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2019-04-20 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Courtney Devane; Regina M Renner; Sarah Munro; Édith Guilbert; Sheila Dunn; Marie-Soleil Wagner; Wendy V Norman Journal: Pilot Feasibility Stud Date: 2019-11-08
Authors: Louise Anne Keogh; Lynn Gillam; Marie Bismark; Kathleen McNamee; Amy Webster; Christine Bayly; Danielle Newton Journal: BMC Med Ethics Date: 2019-01-31 Impact factor: 2.652