Effectiveness, safety and acceptability of no-test medical abortion
provided via telemedicine: a national cohort study
Abstract
Objective To compare the effectiveness, safety and acceptability of
medical abortion before and after the introduction of no-test
telemedicine Design Cohort study Setting The three main abortion
providers in England Population All patients having an early medical
abortion (comprising 85% of all medical abortions performed nationally)
Methods Comparison of no-test telemedicine hybrid model vs. traditional
model (blanket in-person provision including ultrasound), adjusted for
baseline differences Main outcome measures Access: waiting time,
gestation Effectiveness: successful medical abortion Safety: significant
adverse events; ectopic pregnancy and late gestation Acceptability:
Patient-reported outcomes Results 52,142 medical abortions were
conducted, 29,984 in the telemedicine-hybrid cohort and 22,158 in the
traditional cohort. Mean waiting times were 4.2 days shorter in the
telemedicine-hybrid cohort and 40% were ≤6 weeks’ gestation vs. 25% in
the traditional cohort (p<0.001). There was no difference in
success rates (98.8% vs. 98.2%, p=1.0), nor in prevalence of serious
adverse events (0.02% vs. 0.04%, p=0.557). Incidence of ectopic
pregnancy was equivalent in both cohorts (0.2%, p=0.796); 0.04% of
abortions appeared to have been provided after 10 weeks’ gestation with
all completed safely at home. In the telemedicine-hybrid cohort,
effectiveness was higher in the telemedicine group vs. the in-person
group (99.2% vs. 98.1%, p<0.001). Acceptability was high
(96% satisfied), 80% reported a future preference for telemedicine,
and none reported that they were unable to consult in private using
teleconsultation. Conclusions Medical abortion provided through a hybrid
model that includes no-test telemedicine without ultrasound is
effective, safe, acceptable, and improves access to care. Funding None