Literature DB >> 29946727

Association of Facility Type With Procedural-Related Morbidities and Adverse Events Among Patients Undergoing Induced Abortions.

Sarah C M Roberts1, Ushma D Upadhyay1, Guodong Liu2, Jennifer L Kerns3, Djibril Ba2, Nancy Beam1, Douglas L Leslie2.   

Abstract

Importance: Multiple states have laws requiring abortion facilities to meet ambulatory surgery center (ASC) standards. There is limited evidence regarding abortion-related morbidities and adverse events following abortions performed at ASCs vs office-based settings. Objective: To compare abortion-related morbidities and adverse events at ASCs vs office-based settings. Design, Setting, and Participants: Retrospective cohort study of women with US private health insurance who underwent induced abortions in an ASC or office-based setting (January 1, 2011-December 31, 2014). Outcomes were abstracted from a large national private insurance claims database during the 6 weeks following the abortion (date of final follow-up, February 11, 2015). Exposures: Facility type for abortion (ASCs vs office-based settings, including facilities such as abortion clinics, nonspecialized clinics, and physician offices). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was any abortion-related morbidity or adverse event (such as retained products of conception, abortion-related infection, hemorrhage, and uterine perforation) within 6 weeks after an abortion. Two secondary outcomes, both subsets of the primary outcome, were major abortion-related morbidities and adverse events (such as hemorrhages treated with a transfusion, missed ectopic pregnancies treated with surgery, and abortion-related infections that resulted in an overnight hospital admission) and abortion-related infections.
Results: Among 49 287 women (mean age, 28 years [SD, 7.3]) who had 50 311 induced abortions, (23 891 [47%] first-trimester aspiration, 13 480 [27%] first-trimester medication, and 12 940 [26%] second trimester or later), 5660 abortions (11%) were performed in ASCs and 44 651 (89%) in office-based settings. Overall, 3.33% had an abortion-related morbidity or adverse event; 0.32% had a major abortion-related morbidity or adverse event; and 0.74% had an abortion-related infection. In adjusted analyses, there was no statistically significant difference between ASCs vs office-based settings, respectively, in the rates of abortion-related morbidities or adverse events (3.25% vs 3.33%, difference, -0.08%; [corrected] 95% CI, -0.58% to 0.43%; adjusted OR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.81-1.17), major morbidities or adverse events (0.26% vs 0.33%; difference, -0.06%; 95% CI, -0.18% to 0.06%; adjusted OR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.45-1.37), or infections (0.58% vs 0.77%; difference, -0.16%; 95% CI, -0.35% to 0.03%; adjusted OR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.52-1.09). Conclusions and Relevance: Among women with private health insurance who had an induced abortion, performance of the abortion in an ambulatory surgical center compared with an office-based setting was not associated with a significant difference in abortion-related morbidities and adverse events. These findings, in addition to individual patient and individual facility factors, may inform decisions about the type of facility in which induced abortions are performed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29946727      PMCID: PMC6583042          DOI: 10.1001/jama.2018.7675

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA        ISSN: 0098-7484            Impact factor:   56.272


  9 in total

1.  Physician procedure volume and related adverse events after surgically induced abortion: a population-based cohort study.

Authors:  Ning Liu; Simone N Vigod; M Michèle Farrugia; Marcelo L Urquia; Joel G Ray
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2019-05-12       Impact factor: 8.262

2.  Data Error.

Authors: 
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2018-07-24       Impact factor: 56.272

3.  Complication Rates and Downstream Medical Costs Associated With Invasive Diagnostic Procedures for Lung Abnormalities in the Community Setting.

Authors:  Jinhai Huo; Ying Xu; Tommy Sheu; Robert J Volk; Ya-Chen Tina Shih
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2019-03-01       Impact factor: 21.873

4.  Evaluation of diagnosis and prognosis with anti-mullerian hormone level in early missed abortion.

Authors:  Juan Xie; Xuan Zhou; Lin Fang; Jun Xiong; Xiaoling Tao
Journal:  Am J Transl Res       Date:  2021-05-15       Impact factor: 4.060

5.  Maternal and procedural factors associated with estimated blood loss in second trimester surgical uterine evacuation: a retrospective cohort analysis.

Authors:  K H Bridges; B J Wolf; A Dempsey; W B Ellison; D Y Williams; S H Wilson
Journal:  Int J Obstet Anesth       Date:  2020-03-06       Impact factor: 2.603

6.  Intraoperative Blood Loss during Induced Abortion: A Comparison of Anesthetics.

Authors:  Camille A Clare; Gabrielle E Hatton; Neela Shrestha; Michael Girshin; Andre Broumas; Danielle Carmel; Mario A Inchiosa
Journal:  Anesthesiol Res Pract       Date:  2018-12-02

7.  Miscarriage Treatment-Related Morbidities and Adverse Events in Hospitals, Ambulatory Surgery Centers, and Office-Based Settings.

Authors:  Sarah C M Roberts; Nancy Beam; Guodong Liu; Ushma D Upadhyay; Douglas L Leslie; Djibril Ba; Jennifer L Kerns
Journal:  J Patient Saf       Date:  2020-12       Impact factor: 2.243

8.  Incidence of sepsis and associated mortality within the first year after cancer diagnosis in middle aged adults: A US population based study.

Authors:  Andry Van de Louw; Austin Cohrs; Douglas Leslie
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-12-28       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Outcomes in 1096 patients with severe thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura before the Caplacizumab era.

Authors:  Andry Van de Louw; Eric Mariotte; Michael Darmon; Austin Cohrs; Douglas Leslie; Elie Azoulay
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-08-12       Impact factor: 3.240

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.