TY - JOUR
T1 - Measurement of abortion safety using community-based surveys
T2 - Findings from three countries
AU - Bell, Suzanne O.
AU - OlaOlorun, Funmilola
AU - Shankar, Mridula
AU - Ahmad, Danish
AU - Guiella, Georges
AU - Omoluabi, Elizabeth
AU - Khanna, Anoop
AU - Hyacinthe, Andoh Kouakou
AU - Moreau, Caroline
N1 - Funding Information:
All funding for this study provided by the Susan Thompson Buffett Foundation (grant number 127941). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript, and the authors are not aware of any donor competing interests.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 Bell et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
PY - 2019/11/1
Y1 - 2019/11/1
N2 - This study aimed to measure abortion safety in Nigeria, Cote d’Ivoire, and Rajasthan, India using population-based abortion data from representative samples of reproductive age women. Interviewers asked women separately about their experience with “pregnancy removal” and “period regulation at a time when you were worried you were pregnant”, and collected details on method(s) and source(s) of abortion. We operationalized safety along two dimensions: 1) whether the method(s) used were non-recommended and put the woman at potentially high risk of abortion related morbidity and mortality (i.e. methods other than surgery and medication abortion drugs); and 2) whether the source(s) used involved a non-clinical (or no) provider(s). We combined source and method information to categorize a woman’s abortion into one of four safety categories. In Nigeria (n = 1,800), 29.1% of abortions involved a recommended method and clinical provider, 5.4% involved a recommended method and non-clinical provider, 2.1% involved a non-recommended method and clinical provider, and 63.4% involved a non-recommended method and non-clinical provider. The corresponding estimates were 32.7%, 3.0%, 1.9%, and 62.4% in Cote d’Ivoire (n = 645) and 39.7%, 25.5%, 3.4%, and 31.4% in Rajasthan (n = 454). Results demonstrate that abortion safety, as measured by abortion related process data, is generally low but varies significantly by legal context. The policy and programmatic strategies employed to improve abortion safety and quality of care are likely to differ for women in different abortion safety categories.
AB - This study aimed to measure abortion safety in Nigeria, Cote d’Ivoire, and Rajasthan, India using population-based abortion data from representative samples of reproductive age women. Interviewers asked women separately about their experience with “pregnancy removal” and “period regulation at a time when you were worried you were pregnant”, and collected details on method(s) and source(s) of abortion. We operationalized safety along two dimensions: 1) whether the method(s) used were non-recommended and put the woman at potentially high risk of abortion related morbidity and mortality (i.e. methods other than surgery and medication abortion drugs); and 2) whether the source(s) used involved a non-clinical (or no) provider(s). We combined source and method information to categorize a woman’s abortion into one of four safety categories. In Nigeria (n = 1,800), 29.1% of abortions involved a recommended method and clinical provider, 5.4% involved a recommended method and non-clinical provider, 2.1% involved a non-recommended method and clinical provider, and 63.4% involved a non-recommended method and non-clinical provider. The corresponding estimates were 32.7%, 3.0%, 1.9%, and 62.4% in Cote d’Ivoire (n = 645) and 39.7%, 25.5%, 3.4%, and 31.4% in Rajasthan (n = 454). Results demonstrate that abortion safety, as measured by abortion related process data, is generally low but varies significantly by legal context. The policy and programmatic strategies employed to improve abortion safety and quality of care are likely to differ for women in different abortion safety categories.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85074634151&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85074634151&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1371/journal.pone.0223146
DO - 10.1371/journal.pone.0223146
M3 - Article
C2 - 31697696
AN - SCOPUS:85074634151
SN - 1932-6203
VL - 14
JO - PloS one
JF - PloS one
IS - 11
M1 - e0223146
ER -