Search

Among the most prevalent and disabling chronic diseases affecting reproductive-aged women worldwide, depression and anxiety can contribute to adverse reproductive health outcomes, including an increased risk of unintended pregnancy and its health and social consequences. For women with these common mental health conditions who want to avoid an unintended pregnancy, effective contraception can be an important strategy to maintain and even improve health and well-being. Reproductive health clinicians play a critical role in providing and managing contraception to help women with mental health considerations achieve their desired fertility. In this commentary, we review the literature on relationships between mental health and contraception and describe considerations for the clinical management of contraception among women with depression and anxiety. We discuss issues related to contraceptive method effectiveness and adherence concerns, mental health-specific contraceptive method safety and drug interaction considerations, and clinical counseling and management strategies. Given important gaps in current scientific knowledge of mental health and contraception, we highlight areas for future research., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Similar to other reviews within the last 4 years, a thorough review by the Royal College of Psychiatrists, published in December 2011, found that compared to delivery of an unintended pregnancy, abortion does not increase women's risk of mental health problems. In contrast, a meta-analysis published in September 2011 concluded that abortion increases women's risk of mental health problems by 81% and that 10% of mental health problems are attributable to abortions. Like others, we strongly question the quality of this meta-analysis and its conclusions. Here we detail seven errors of this meta-analysis and three significant shortcomings of the included studies because policy, practice and the public have been misinformed. These errors and shortcomings render the meta-analysis' conclusions invalid., (Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Some abortion policies in the U.S. are based on the notion that abortion harms women's mental health. The American Psychological Association (APA) Task Force on Abortion and Mental Health concluded that first-trimester abortions do not harm women's mental health. However, the APA task force does not make conclusions regarding later abortions (second trimester or beyond) and mental health. This paper critically evaluates studies on later abortion and mental health in order to inform both policy and practice., Method: Using guidelines outlined by Steinberg and Russo (2009), post 1989 quantitative studies on later abortion and mental health were evaluated on the following qualities: 1) composition of comparison groups, 2) how prior mental health was assessed, and 3) whether common risk factors were controlled for in analyses if a significant relationship between abortion and mental health was found. Studies were evaluated with respect to the claim that later abortions harm women's mental health., Results: Eleven quantitative studies that compared the mental health of women having later abortions (for reasons of fetal anomaly) with other groups were evaluated. Findings differed depending on the comparison group. No studies considered the role of prepregnancy mental health, and one study considered whether factors common among women having later abortions and mental health problems drove the association between later abortion and mental health., Conclusion: Policies based on the notion that later abortions (because of fetal anomaly) harm women's mental health are unwarranted. Because research suggests that most women who have later abortions do so for reasons other than fetal anomaly, future investigations should examine women's psychological experiences around later abortions., (Copyright © 2011 Jacobs Institute of Women's Health. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

This is a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of research on mental health outcomes of abortion. Does abortion increase the risk of adverse mental health outcomes? That is the central question for this review. Our review aims to inform policy and practice by locating, critically appraising, and synthesizing empirical evidence on associations between abortion and subsequent mental health outcomes. Given the controversies surrounding this topic and the complex social, political, legal, and ideological contexts in which research and reviews on abortion are conducted, it is especially important to conduct this systematic review and meta-analysis with comprehensive, rigorous, unbiased, and transparent methods. We will include a variety of study designs to enhance understanding of studies methodological strengths and weaknesses and to identify potential explanations for conflicting results. We will follow open science principles, providing access to our methods, measures, and results, and making data available for re-analysis.

Background: Symptoms of mental distress increased sharply during the COVID-19 pandemic, especially among older adolescents and young adults. Mental health distress may make it more challenging for young people to seek other needed health care, including contraception. This study explored the association of symptoms of depression, anxiety, and stress with delays in getting a contraceptive method or prescription. Materials and Methods: Data from a supplementary study (May 15, 2020-March 20, 2023) to a cluster randomized trial in 29 sites in Texas and California were used. The diverse study sample included community college students assigned female at birth of ages 18-29 years (n = 1,665 with 7,023 observations over time). We measured the association of depression (CES-D [Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale]) or anxiety and stress (DASS-21 [Depression Anxiety Stress Scales]) symptoms with delayed contraceptive care-seeking with mixed-effects multivariable regression with random effects for individual and site. We controlled for age and sociodemographic factors important for access to care. Results: Over one-third of participants (35%) reported they delayed getting the contraceptive method they needed. Multivariable regression results showed increased odds of delayed contraceptive care among participants with symptoms of depression (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.58, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.27-1.96). Likewise, delays were associated with anxiety and stress symptoms (aOR 1.46, 95% CI 1.17-1.82). Adolescents were more likely to delay seeking contraception than young adults (aOR 1.32, 95% CI 1.07-1.63). Conclusions: Results showed a strong association between mental distress and delayed contraception. Interventions are needed to increase contraceptive access for young people delaying care, along with supportive mental health care services, including for adolescents who face elevated odds of delay. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03519685.

ObjectiveAmong women initiating new prescription contraception, we investigated the relationship between recent depression and a range of contraceptive behaviors.Study designWe used medical and pharmacy records of 52,325 women ages 19 to 29 who initiated prescription contraception (pills, patches or rings, injectables, and long-acting reversible contraceptives) in 2014-2016 at a large integrated healthcare system in Northern California. Women had continuous enrollment for a year before and after initiating, and no records of prescription contraceptive use in the year before initiating. Depression in the year prior to initiation was dichotomized into (1) no depression indicator (reference group) or (2) depression diagnosis or redeemed antidepressant. Multinomial logistic regression models examined the associations between depression and method type initiated, and contraceptive patterns, timing of discontinuation, inconsistent use, and switching methods over a year after initiating, adjusting for sociodemographics and testing for interactions between depression and having a recent birth or abortion.ResultsWomen with recent depression were more likely to initiate methods other than the pill, and the association was stronger for patches or rings vs pills among those with a recent birth compared to those without. Among women initiating all methods and the pill, those with depression were more likely to discontinue their method, use it inconsistently, and switch from it than use it continuously for a year.ConclusionWomen with recent depression were less likely to initiate the pill; and when the pill was initiated, those with depression were more likely to discontinue use, use it inconsistently, and switch from it.ImplicationsWomen with recent depression indicators should be followed closely to ensure they have the support they need to meet their reproductive goals. Those who wish to avoid pregnancy may benefit from methods that do not require daily use.

Background: We examined whether experiencing more types of lifetime intimate partner violence (IPV) was independently associated with the effectiveness level of the contraceptive method women chose following an abortion. Materials and Methods: Using data on 245 women who were attending an urban hospital abortion clinic, we assessed whether women had ever experienced emotional, physical, or sexual IPV. Effectiveness of women's post-abortion contraceptive method selection was categorized into high (intrauterine device [IUD] and implant), moderate (pill, patch, ring, and shot), and low (condoms, emergency contraception, and none) effectiveness. Using multinomial logistic regression, we examined the relationship between number of types of IPV experienced and post-abortion contraceptive method effectiveness, adjusting for sociodemographics, prior abortion, having children, abortion trimester, importance of avoiding pregnancy in the next year, pre-abortion psychological distress, and effectiveness level of the contraceptive method women were planning to use before contraceptive counseling. Results: Twenty-seven percent (27%) of women experienced two or three types of IPV, 35% experienced one IPV type, and 38% experienced no IPV. Compared to women with no histories of IPV, women who experienced two or more types of IPV during their lifetimes were more likely to choose contraceptive methods with moderate effectiveness (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 5.23, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.13-24.23, p = 0.035) and high effectiveness (AOR = 5.01, 95% CI: 1.12-22.39, p = 0.035) than those with low effectiveness. Conclusion: Women who experienced two or more types of lifetime IPV selected more effective contraceptive methods post-abortion. Access to contraceptives that are not partner dependent, including long-acting reversible contraceptives (LARC), may be particularly important for women who have experienced multiple types of IPV.

RATIONALE:More thoroughly understanding the association between elevated depressive symptoms and effectiveness level of contraceptive method selected at a reproductive health visit could help women prevent unintended pregnancy. OBJECTIVE:This study examined how the association between both current and past depressive symptoms and effectiveness level of contraceptive method selected at a clinic visit varies by type of reproductive health visit. METHODS:Current and past depressive symptoms and contraceptive method selected were assessed among 1215 women aged 18-25 years seeking general reproductive health or abortion services at 40 community clinics throughout the United States. Using standard categories of effectiveness based on pregnancy rates during typical use, women's contraceptive method selected was coded as a low (e.g., no method, withdrawal, condoms), moderately (pill, patch, ring, or shot), or highly effective method (IUD, sterilization, implant). Depression status was divided into four categories: 1) no elevated depressive symptoms ever, 2) current elevated depressive symptoms only, 3) past elevated depressive symptoms only, and 4) past and current elevated depressive symptoms. Visit type, general reproductive health versus abortion care, was a moderator. The interaction effect between depressive symptoms and visit type on contraceptive method effectiveness level chosen was estimated with multinomial logistic regression analyses. RESULTS:In general reproductive health visits, having both elevated current and past depressive symptoms increased women's likelihood of choosing low versus moderately effective methods (RRR = 5.63, 95% CI = 2.31 to 13.71, p

This is a protocol for a systematic review and meta‐analysis of research on mental health outcomes of abortion. Does abortion increase the risk of adverse mental health outcomes? That is the central question for this review. Our review aims to inform policy and practice by locating, critically appraising, and synthesizing empirical evidence on associations between abortion and subsequent mental health outcomes. Given the controversies surrounding this topic and the complex social, political, legal, and ideological contexts in which research and reviews on abortion are conducted, it is especially important to conduct this systematic review and meta‐analysis with comprehensive, rigorous, unbiased, and transparent methods. We will include a variety of study designs to enhance understanding of studies' methodological strengths and weaknesses and to identify potential explanations for conflicting results. We will follow open science principles, providing access to our methods, measures, and results, and making data available for re‐analysis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

RationaleMost research in mental health and abortion has examined factors associated with post-abortion psychological health. However, research that follows women from before to after their abortion consistently finds that depressive, anxiety, and stress symptoms are highest just before an abortion compared to any time afterwards.ObjectiveThis finding suggests that studies investigating psychosocial factors related to pre-abortion mental health are warranted.MethodsThe current study uses data from 353 women seeking abortions at three community reproductive health clinics to examine predictors of pre-abortion psychological health. Drawing from three perspectives in the abortion and mental health literature, common risks, stress and coping, and sociocultural context, we conducted multivariable analyses to examine the contribution of important factors on depressive, anxiety, and stress symptoms just before an abortion, including sociodemographics, abortion characteristics, childhood adversities, recent adversities with an intimate partner, relationship context, future pregnancy desires, and perceived abortion stigma.ResultsChildhood and partner adversities, including reproductive coercion, were associated with negative mental health symptoms, as was perceived abortion stigma. Before perceived abortion stigma was entered into the model, 18.6%, 20.7%, and 16.8% of the variance in depressive, anxiety, and stress symptoms respectively, was explained. Perceived abortion stigma explained an additional 13.2%, 9.7%, and 10.7% of the variance in depressive, anxiety, and stress symptoms pre-abortion.ConclusionThis study, one of the first to focus on pre-abortion mental health as an outcome, suggests that addressing stigma among women seeking abortions may significantly lower their psychological distress.

ObjectiveTo examine whether a first abortion increases risk of mental health disorders compared with a first childbirth with and without considering prepregnancy mental health and adverse exposures, childhood economic status, miscarriage history, age at first abortion or childbirth, and race or ethnicity.MethodsA cohort study compared rates of mental disorders (anxiety, mood, impulse-control, substance use, eating disorders, and suicidal ideation) among 259 women postabortion and 677 women postchildbirth aged 18-42 years at the time of interview from The National Comorbidity Survey-Replication.ResultsThe percentage of women with no, one, two, and three or more mental health disorders before their first abortion was 37.8%, 19.7%, 15.2%, and 27.3% and before their first childbirth was 57.9%, 19.6%, 9.2%, and 13.3%, respectively, indicating that women in the abortion group had more prior mental health disorders than women in the childbirth group (P

ObjectiveWe investigated whether more psychological distress before an abortion is associated with the effectiveness of contraception selected (low, moderate, or high effectiveness) at an abortion clinic visit.MethodUsing data from 253 women attending an urban abortion clinic that primarily serves low-income women, we tested the association between pre-abortion psychological distress and the effectiveness level of post-abortion contraceptive choice. Based on typical use failure rates, we classified effectiveness of contraceptive choice into three levels-low, moderate, and high effectiveness. We measured psychological distress with four validated measures of depressive, anxious, and stress symptoms, and negative affect, as well as with a global measure comprising these four measures. We used multivariable ordinal logistic regression to measure the association of each psychological distress measure with post-abortion contraceptive method effectiveness level, adjusting for sociodemographic factors, pregnancy history, trimester of abortion, and importance of avoiding pregnancy in the next year.ResultsWe found that compared to women experiencing less stress symptoms, negative affect and global psychological distress, women experiencing more stress symptoms [AOR=1.028, 95% CI: 1.001-1.050], negative affect [AOR=1.05, 95% CI: 1.01-1.09] and global psychological distress [AOR=1.46, 95% CI: 1.09-1.95] were more likely to choose more effective versus less effective methods, p

Although many studies have found an association between childhood adversities and mental health disorders, few have examined whether childhood adversities are linked to having abortions. This research investigates the association between a range of childhood adversities and risk of abortion in part to identify which adversities should be considered when examining the association between abortion and subsequent mental health. Using the U.S. National Comorbidity Survey-Replication (NCS-R), we tested the association between 10 childhood adversities and risk of 0, 1, or multiple abortions among 1511 women ages 18-41. We employed multinomial logistic regression to examine the independent association between each childhood adversity and number of subsequent abortions, controlling for sociodemographic factors, total number of pregnancies, and each adversity. Women who had experienced two or more personal safety threats, one parental mental illness, or two or more parental mental illnesses while growing up were more likely subsequently to have multiple versus no abortions [Relative Risk Ratio (RRR) = 9.87, 95% CI: 2.45-39.72; OR = 2.81, 95% CI: 1.27-6.21; RRR = 5.28, 95% CI: 1.60-17.38, respectively], and multiple versus one abortion [RRR = 13.33, 95% CI: 2.48-71.68; RRR = 2.17, 95% CI: 1.03-4.56; RRR = 3.67, 95% CI: 1.15-11.76, respectively]. Women who had experienced childhood physical abuse were more likely to have one compared to no abortions [RRR = 2.00; 1.19-3.34]. These results suggest that some childhood adversities may partially explain the association between abortion and mental health. Accordingly, they should be considered in future research examining the link between abortion and mental health.

The proportion of abortions provided by medication in the United States and worldwide has increased greatly since the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved mifepristone in 2000. While existing research has shown that abortion does not increase risk of mental health problems, no population-based study has examined specifically whether a procedural or medication abortion increases risk of mental health disorders. This study examined whether mental health disorders increased in the shorter and longer-term after a medication or procedural abortion. Using Danish population registers' data, we conducted a prospective cohort study in which we included 72,424 females born in Denmark between 1980 and 2006, who were ages 12 to 38 during the study period and had a first first-trimester abortion before 13 weeks gestation in 2000 to 2018. Females with no previous psychiatric diagnoses were followed from 1 year before their abortion until their first psychiatric diagnosis, December 31, 2018, emigration from Demark, or death, whichever came first. Risk of any first psychiatric disorder was defined as a recorded psychiatric diagnosis at an in- or out-patient facility from the 1 year after to more than 5 years after a medication or procedural abortion relative to the year beforehand. Results were adjusted for calendar year, age, gestational age, partner status, prior mental and physical health, childbirth history, childhood environment, and parental mental health history. Females having medication (n=37,155) and procedural abortions (n=35,269) had the same risk of any first psychiatric diagnosis in the year after their abortion relative to the year before their abortion (medication abortion adjusted incidence rate ratio [MaIRR]=1.02, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.93–1.12; procedural abortion adjusted incidence rate ratio [PaIRR]=0.94, 95% CI: 0.86–1.02). Moreover, as more time from the abortion passed, the risk of a psychiatric diagnoses decreased relative to the year before their abortion for each abortion method (MaIRR 1–2 years after=0.89, 95% CI: 0.80–0.98; PaIRR 1–2 years after=0.81, 95% CI: 0.88–1.05; MaIRR 2–5 years after=0.77, 95% CI: 0.71–0.84; PaIRR 2–5 years after=0.72, 95% CI: 0.67–0.78; MaIRR 5+ years after=0.58, 95% CI: 0.53–0.63; PaIRR 5+ years after=0.54, 95% CI: 0.50–0.58). Because the risk of psychiatric diagnoses was the same in the year after relative to the year before a medication and procedural abortion and the risk did not increase as more time after the abortion increased, neither abortion method increased risk of mental health disorders in the shorter or longer-term. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: We examined whether preabortion depressive symptoms were associated with contraceptive method effectiveness level chosen among women seeking abortions.Study Design: Three-hundred and forty-seven young, low-income women 18 years or older who were seeking abortions at 3 community reproductive health clinics in Northern California were recruited to participate in a study on contraceptive decision making. We classified women into choosing low-, moderate- or high-effectiveness contraceptive methods based on typical-use failure rates. We used the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression scale to assess depressive symptoms as a continuous and dichotomous variable. Using the standard cutoff of 20, women who scored at or above this were considered depressed for the dichotomous measure. We used multinomial logistic regression to examine the association between preabortion depressive symptoms and contraceptive effectiveness level chosen to use after an abortion, adjusting for sociodemographics, abortion characteristics, pregnancy history, future pregnancy desires, relationship characteristics and adverse experiences.Results: After adjusting for covariates, we found that a one-unit increase in depressive symptoms was associated with a higher likelihood of choosing low- versus moderate- [adjusted odd ratio (aOR)=1.05, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.01-1.10, p<.02] and high-effectiveness methods (aOR=1.05, 95% CI: 1.002-1.10, p<.05). Furthermore, women scoring above the cutoff for depression were more likely to choose low- versus moderate-effectiveness methods (aOR=4.56, 95% CI: 1.27-16.32, p=.02).Conclusions: More preabortion depressive symptoms were independently associated with choosing low- versus moderate- and high-effectiveness contraceptives.Implications: These findings together with other findings show that preabortion depressive symptoms do not uniformly influence effectiveness level of contraceptive method selected to use after an abortion. Reproductive health care providers should consider the impact of women's psychological symptoms on their contraceptive decision making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Using the US National Comorbidity Survey (NCS), published an analysis indicating that compared to women who had never had an abortion, women who had reported an abortion were at an increased risk of several anxiety, mood, and substance use disorders. Here, we show that those results are not replicable. That is, using the same data, sample, and codes as indicated by those authors, it is not possible to replicate the simple bivariate statistics testing the relationship of ever having had an abortion to each mental health disorder when no factors were controlled for in analyses ( in ). Furthermore, among women with prior pregnancies in the NCS, we investigated whether having zero, one, or multiple abortions (abortion history) was associated with having a mood, anxiety, or substance use disorder at the time of the interview. In doing this, we tested two competing frameworks: the abortion-as-trauma versus the common-risk-factors approach. Our results support the latter framework. In the bivariate context when no other factors were included in models, abortion history was not related to having a mood disorder, but it was related to having an anxiety or substance use disorder. When prior mental health and violence experience were controlled in our models, no significant relation was found between abortion history and anxiety disorders. When these same risk factors and other background factors were controlled, women who had multiple abortions remained at an increased risk of having a substance use disorder compared to women who had no abortions, likely because we were unable to control for other risk factors associated with having an abortion and substance use. Policy, practice, and research should focus on assisting women at greatest risk of having unintended pregnancies and having poor mental health—those with violence in their lives and prior mental health problems. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

A letter to the editor is presented in response to the article "Does Abortion Reduce the Mental Health Risks of Unwanted or Unintended Pregnancy? A Re-appraisal of the Evidence," by D. M. Fergusson, L. J. Horwood, and J. M. Boden in an issue.