Premium
Variation in Pregnancy Options Counseling and Referrals, And Reported Proximity to Abortion Services, Among Publicly Funded Family Planning Facilities
Author(s) -
Hebert Luciana E.,
Fabiyi Camille,
Hasselbacher Lee A.,
Starr Katherine,
Gilliam Melissa L.
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
perspectives on sexual and reproductive health
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.818
H-Index - 93
eISSN - 1931-2393
pISSN - 1538-6341
DOI - 10.1363/48e8816
Subject(s) - abortion , referral , family planning , family medicine , medicine , reproductive health , pregnancy , context (archaeology) , logistic regression , multinomial logistic regression , odds ratio , population , environmental health , geography , genetics , archaeology , pathology , machine learning , computer science , research methodology , biology
CONTEXT As frontline providers, publicly funded family planning clinics represent a critical link in the health system for women seeking information about pregnancy options, yet scant information exists on their provision of relevant services. Understanding their practices is important for gauging how well these facilities serve patients’ needs.METHODS A 2012 survey of 567 publicly funded family planning facilities in 16 states gathered information on referral‐making for adoption and abortion services, and perceived proximity to abortion services. Chi‐square, multivariable logistic regression and multinomial logistic regression analyses were performed to assess differences among facilities in referral‐making and reported proximity to abortion services.RESULTS Abortion referrals were provided by a significantly smaller proportion of providers than were adoption referrals (84% vs. 97%). Health departments and community health centers were significantly less likely than comprehensive reproductive health centers to refer for abortion services and to have a list of abortion providers available (odds ratios, 0.1–0.2). Rural facilities were more likely than urban ones to report a distance of more than 100 miles to the closest first‐trimester abortion provider (relative risk ratio, 11.4), second‐trimester abortion provider (8.7) and medication abortion provider (8.0). Health departments were more likely than comprehensive reproductive health centers not to know the location of the closest first‐trimester, second‐trimester or medication abortion provider (2.5–3.5).CONCLUSION A better understanding of disparities in provision of pregnancy options counseling and referrals at publicly funded family planning clinics is needed to ensure that women get timely care.