Differences in efficacy, differences in providers: results from a hazard analysis of medical abortion

被引:14
作者
Hedley, A
Trussell, J
Turner, AN
Coyaji, K
Ngoc, NTN
Winikoff, B
Ellertson, C
机构
[1] Princeton Univ, Off Populat Res, Princeton, NJ 08544 USA
[2] Univ N Carolina, Dept Epidemiol, Chapel Hill, NC 27515 USA
[3] KEM Hosp, Pune, Maharashtra, India
[4] Hung Vuong Obstet & Gynaecol Hosp, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam
[5] Gynu Hlth Projects, New York, NY USA
[6] Ibis Reprod Hlth, Cambridge, England
关键词
medical abortion; vacuum aspiration; hazard analysis;
D O I
10.1016/j.contraception.2003.11.010
中图分类号
R71 [妇产科学];
学科分类号
100211 ;
摘要
Sample sizes of even the largest medical abortion trials are generally not adequate to provide an understanding of how well the regimen works for subgroups of women, particularly when controlling for factors known to influence efficacy, such as gestational age. By pooling data from four previously published studies of medical abortion and using hazard analyses, we can undertake such an investigation. We find that women with lower gestational ages, women younger than 23 years of age, women with more than 12 years of education and women with no previous induced abortion experience were more likely to experience a successful medical abortion. After taking into account demographic factors, we find that significant differences in efficacy persist across study sites, indicating that differences in providers' tendency to intervene by performing vacuum aspiration vary across medical abortion providers. (C) 2004 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:157 / 163
页数:7
相关论文
共 11 条
[1]  
Clark S, 2000, J Am Med Womens Assoc (1972), V55, P177
[2]   Mifepristone abortion outside the urban research hospital setting in India [J].
Coyaji, K ;
Elul, B ;
Krishna, U ;
Otiv, S ;
Ambardekar, S ;
Bopardikar, A ;
Raote, V ;
Ellertson, C ;
Winikoff, B .
LANCET, 2001, 357 (9250) :120-122
[3]   Body weight and risk of oral contraceptive failure [J].
Holt, VL ;
Cushing-Haugen, KL ;
Daling, JR .
OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2002, 99 (05) :820-827
[4]   The efficacy of medical abortion: A meta-analysis [J].
Kahn, JG ;
Becker, BJ ;
Maclsaa, L ;
Amory, JK ;
Neuhaus, J ;
Olkin, I ;
Creinin, MD .
CONTRACEPTION, 2000, 61 (01) :29-40
[5]  
Newhall Elizabeth Pirruccello, 2000, American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, V183, pS44
[6]   Safety, efficacy and acceptability of mifepristone-misoprostol medical abortion in Vietnam [J].
Ngoc, NTN ;
Winikoff, B ;
Clark, S ;
Ellertson, C ;
Am, KN ;
Hieu, DT ;
Elul, B .
INTERNATIONAL FAMILY PLANNING PERSPECTIVES, 1999, 25 (01) :10-+
[7]  
PEYRON R, 1995, PRESSE MED, V24, P295
[8]   Early pregnancy termination with mifepristone and misoprostol in the United States [J].
Spitz, IM ;
Bardin, CW ;
Benton, L ;
Robbins, A .
NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 1998, 338 (18) :1241-1247
[9]   The efficacy and tolerance of mifepristone and prostaglandin in termination of pregnancy of less than 63 days gestation; UK multicentre study - Final results [J].
Urquhart, DR ;
Templeton, AA ;
Shinewi, F ;
Chapman, M ;
Hawkins, K ;
McGarry, J ;
Rodger, M ;
Baird, DT ;
Bjornsson, S ;
Macnaughton, M ;
Lunan, CB ;
Macrow, P ;
Elstein, M ;
Killick, S ;
Hill, NCW ;
Turnbull, AC ;
MacKenzie, IZ ;
Radcliffe, J ;
Cohn, M ;
Stewart, P ;
Bryce, F ;
Lilford, RJ ;
Johnson, N ;
Li, TC ;
Cooke, ID ;
Olajide, F ;
Chard, T ;
Lim, B ;
Lees, DAR ;
Subramanyan, V ;
Grudzinskas, JG ;
Davey, A .
CONTRACEPTION, 1997, 55 (01) :1-5
[10]   Safety, efficacy, and acceptability of medical abortion in China, Cuba, and India: A comparative trial of mifepristone-misoprostol versus surgical abortion [J].
Winikoff, B ;
Sivin, I ;
Coyaji, KJ ;
Cabezas, E ;
Xiao, BL ;
Gu, SJ ;
Du, MK ;
Krishna, UR ;
Eschen, A ;
Ellertson, C .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 1997, 176 (02) :431-437