Search

Despite framing of abortion attitudes as polarized, attitudes may be more complex. After classifying women by their abortion identity (ie, pro-life, pro-choice, or neither/both), we examined the complexity of their abortion attitude. We used 2018–2019 data from a population-representative sample of Ohio women aged 18–44 to assess views on abortion based on: 1) availability, 2) acceptability, 3) fear of imprisonment, 4) feelings toward providers, and 5) views toward federal bans. We calculated complexity scores for the individual's degree of variation in responses and compared across abortion identity. Respondents' views were categorized as polarized, mixed, or complex. We used ordered logistic regression to evaluate the association between sociodemographic characteristics and complexity scores. Overall, most (53%) had polarized abortion views. Among pro-life women, 46% were polarized and 28% held complex views. In comparison, among pro-choice women, 78% were polarized and only 2% held complex views. Among those identifying as neither/both, the plurality (44%) had mixed views. Eight factors were associated with having higher complexity scores: rural Appalachia residence, lower socioeconomic status, older age, being married, having live children, not knowing someone who had an abortion, attending religious services more regularly, and holding middle-ground political ideologies. While most women in Ohio held polarized views on abortion, those with pro-life or neither/both abortion identity had more complex views. These findings suggest that Ohio policies that completely ban abortion are incongruent with public sentiment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Crisis pregnancy centers (CPCs) provide social support, material aid, and counseling against abortion. We evaluated the perspectives of CPC clients to understand how they found the CPC that they attended for services. In 2019, we conducted in-depth interviews with 21 clients of 10 CPCs in Ohio, who were recruited from the CPC ( n  = 9) or an abortion clinic ( n  = 12), to understand their experiences attending the center. This analysis focused on the ways in which pregnant people end up as clients at a CPC seeking assistance instead of attending another setting, such as a medical center. We identified two pathways through which clients find CPCs. First, in the internet pathway , clients needing abortion services found CPCs via internet search for pregnancy symptoms, abortion care, or ultrasound services. Second, in the social safety network pathway , clients needing material aid found CPCs through recommendations from trusted others and due to the proximity of CPCs to their homes. Structural conditions influence the pathways clients pursue, such as the need for healthcare services and material aid. Future research should further explore the demographics of those who attend CPCs and motivations for attendance.

Background: The number of women using long-acting reversible contraception (LARC)-intrauterine devices (IUDs) and implants-is increasing and 14% of contraceptive users in the United States adopt LARC. We examined correlates of LARC never-use in a population-based survey of reproductive-aged women in Ohio., Methods: We analyzed data from the 2018-19 Ohio Survey of Women. We examined the prevalence of LARC never-use and reasons for never-use among ever users of contraception (N = 2388). Using Poisson regression to generate prevalence ratios (PRs), we examined associations between selected correlates (demographic factors, healthcare access/quality measures, and religious/political views) and LARC never-use., Results: Most Ohio women (74%) had never used LARC. Commonly reported reasons for not using an IUD or an implant were preferring a different method (46% and 45%, respectively), not wanting an object inside their body (45% and 43%), side effect concerns (39% and 33%), insertion/removal concerns (31% and 25%), and unfamiliarity (13% and 20%). Conservative political views (PR: 1.12, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.04-1.22), pro-life affiliation (PR: 1.11, 95% CI: 1.02-1.20), placing high importance on religion in daily life (PR: 1.15, 95% CI: 1.06-1.26), and being non-Hispanic white as compared to non-Hispanic Black (PR: 1.20, 95% CI: 1.02-1.41) were significantly associated with LARC never-use. Findings were generally similar for models analyzing IUD and implant never-use separately., Conclusions: Among ever-users of contraception, LARC never-use was associated with having conservative political views, being religious, and having a pro-life affiliation. Except for race/ethnicity, demographic and healthcare measures were not associated with LARC never-use among women in Ohio., (© 2022 The Authors. Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of University of Ottawa.)

Background: The relationship between housing instability and reproductive healthcare is understudied. We examined the association between housing insecurity and access and utilization of general healthcare, contraceptive healthcare, and abortion care., Methods: Using data from a population-representative survey of adult reproductive-age Ohio women (N = 2,529), we assessed housing insecurity (not paying rent/mortgage on time in the past year). We examined associations between housing insecurity and the following outcomes: (1) not being able to access general healthcare in the past year; (2) experiencing delays or difficulties in accessing contraceptive healthcare in the past year; and (3) ever having an abortion. We used unadjusted and adjusted logistic regression models. We selected confounders a priori and included age, socioeconomic status, and healthcare status., Results: Overall, 10.6% of Ohio women of adult reproductive age experienced housing insecurity. Approximately 27.5% of respondents were not able to access general healthcare and 10.4% experienced delays or difficulties in accessing contraceptive care. Compared to housing-secure respondents, housing-insecure women were less able to access general healthcare (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]:2.16; 95% confidence interval [CI]:1.45-3.23) and more likely to experience delays or difficulties when accessing contraceptive care (aOR:1.74; 95% CI:1.00-3.04). Insecure housing was not statistically associated with ever having an abortion (aOR:1.76; 95% CI:0.93-3.34)., Conclusions: In this study, recent housing insecurity was associated with poorer access to general and contraceptive healthcare. Studies utilizing multidimensional measures of housing insecurity and other material insecurity measures are needed to further explore the relationship between material insecurity and access to general and contraceptive care., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Abortion is highly stigmatized in the United States which prevents its accurate measurement in surveys. The list experiment aims to improve the reporting of abortion history. We evaluated whether a list experiment resulted in higher reporting of abortion experiences than did two direct questions. Utilizing data from a representative survey of adult women of reproductive age in Ohio, we examined abortion history using two direct questions and a double list experiment. Through the double list experiment, we asked respondents to report how many of two lists of health items they had experienced; one list included abortion. We compared weighted history of abortion between these measures and by respondent demographic characteristics (age and socioeconomic status). Estimates of abortion history were similar between direct and list experiment questions. When measured with the two different direct question of abortion history, 8.4% and 8.0% of all respondents indicated ever having an abortion and with the list experiment, 8.5% indicated ever having an abortion. In a Midwestern state-level survey, the list experiment did not lead to increases in abortion reporting as compared to the direct questions. Subgroup analyses require larger samples, and future iterations should incorporate related but non-stigmatized control items to reduce misclassification and under-powering of such subgroup analyses., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Objective: Despite overwhelming data supporting the safety of abortion care in the U.S., public perceptions of abortion safety vary widely. While evidence suggests that the public overestimates abortion risk, few studies have analyzed why people think abortion is safe or unsafe., Study Design: Using data from the Ohio Survey of Women, a representative survey of women aged 18 to 44 years with a residential address in Ohio, we examined responses to 2 questions about abortion safety perceptions: the first asked respondents to rate abortion safety in Ohio, and the second asked respondents why they chose this rating of abortion safety. We analyzed these responses with inductive and deductive approaches., Results: There were 2529 responses, of which 1368 (54%) provided a response to the open-ended question about abortion safety. From this subset, 529 gave open-ended responses indicating that they perceive abortion as safe, with 47% attributing this perception to the procedure being performed by a professional in a regulated environment. In contrast, 370 gave open-ended responses indicating that they perceive abortion as unsafe; the most common explanations referred to health risks (19%) and that safety depends on preexisting health conditions (19%)., Conclusion: Many participants perceived abortion as safe because it is performed by professionals in a clinical environment or because of personal experiences with abortion. Those perceiving a lack of safety provided more varied responses, including that abortion was dangerous due to a detrimental effect on mental health or protesters at abortion clinics., Implications: We identified that women have a broad range of reasons for perceiving abortion as safe or unsafe. Providers should be aware of this diversity of abortion safety perceptions so that they can best engage with their patients.This updated characterization of pain experienced during an evidence-based medication abortion regimen may allow for better pain-related counseling, tailoring of opioid prescription practices, and improvement in patient satisfaction., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: We sought to quantify the prevalence of ever attendance at a crisis pregnancy center (CPC) among adult, reproductive-age women in Ohio and identify demographic factors associated with ever attendance., Study Design: We analyzed data from the Ohio Survey of Women, a survey of adult, reproductive-age women (N = 2529) conducted in 2018 to 2019. We calculated unadjusted and adjusted prevalence ratios (PRs) to evaluate the possible associations between demographic factors and ever CPC attendance. Analyses used statistical weights to be population-representative., Results: Analyses are based on women reporting ever (n = 291) or never CPC attendance (n = 2151). Prevalence of ever CPC attendance was 13.5%. Ever CPC attendance was higher among women of Black, non-Hispanic race/ethnicity (adjusted PR, 2.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.4-3.2) and currently in the lowest socioeconomic status (SES) stratum (defined as less than a college degree and annual household income less than $75,000) (aPR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.1-2.3) compared to those of other race/ethnicity and in the highest SES stratum., Conclusions: Disparities exist among adult women in Ohio regarding their ever use of CPCs. Because CPCs typically are not medical facilities and may provide inaccurate information, future studies should evaluate a wider range of correlates of recent CPC attendance., Implications: Findings from a population-based survey of adult, reproductive-age women in Ohio indicate that ever attendance to a CPC for pregnancy-related care is not rare, and this attendance is higher among Black/non-Hispanic women and those of low SES compared to other women., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Legislative and judicial procedures related to banning abortion after 6 weeks of gestation in Ohio occurred from November 2018 to July 2019. These activities could have increased the belief that abortion has become illegal even though the 6-week abortion ban has never been in effect to date., Objective: We sought to determine the prevalence and correlates of holding the belief that abortion is illegal in Ohio and to evaluate whether this belief increased over the time in which the 6-week abortion ban was introduced, passed twice, and then blocked in Ohio., Study Design: We analyzed data from the first wave of the Ohio Survey of Women, a population-based survey of adult, reproductive-aged Ohioan women conducted from October 2018 to June 2019. During each of the 8 survey months, a median of 240 women (range, 70-761) completed the survey, including the survey question "Based on what you know or have heard, is it legal to get an abortion in your state?" We used multivariable logistic regression to assess the prevalence and correlates of believing that abortion is illegal in the state of Ohio. In addition, we used multinomial logistic regression to evaluate whether this belief increased over the interval during which women completed the survey, which roughly corresponded to the interval marked by legislative and judicial activities surrounding the 6-week abortion ban., Results: Most of the 2359 participants understood that abortion is legal in the state of Ohio (64.0%) with the remainder believing it to be illegal (9.8%) or being unsure (26.2%). Correlates of believing abortion to be illegal included younger age, lower socioeconomic status, never married or married status, and Black, non-Hispanic race and ethnicity. Being unsure about legality did not change over time; however, the proportion of women who believed that abortion is illegal increased from the first month (4.5%) to the last month (15.9%) of the study period. Each additional study month was associated with a 17% increase in the odds of believing abortion to be illegal, in both unadjusted and adjusted models (odds ratio, 1.17; 95% confidence interval, 1.08-1.27)., Conclusion: Attempts to restrict abortion access could contribute to women mistakenly believing that abortion is illegal despite it being unsuccessful., (Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: We describe the prevalence and correlates of nonuse of preferred contraceptive method among women 18-44 years of age in Ohio using contraception., Study Design: The population-representative Ohio Survey of Women had 2529 participants in 2018-2019, with a response rate of 33.5%. We examined prevalence of preferred method nonuse, reasons for nonuse, and satisfaction with current method among current contraception users (n = 1390). We evaluated associations between demographic and healthcare factors and preferred method nonuse., Results: About 25% of women reported not using their preferred contraceptive method. The most common barrier to obtaining preferred method was affordability (13%). Those not using their preferred method identified long-acting methods (49%), oral contraception (33%), or condoms (21%) as their preferred methods. The proportion using their preferred method was highest among intrauterine device (IUD) users (86%) and lowest among emergency contraception users (64%). About 16% of women using permanent contraception reported it was not their preferred method. Having the lowest socioeconomic status (versus highest) (prevalence ratio [PR]: 1.47, 95% CI: 1.11-1.96), Hispanic ethnicity (versus non-Hispanic white) (PR: 1.83, 95% CI: 1.15-2.90), reporting poor provider satisfaction related to contraceptive care (PR: 2.33, 95% CI: 1.02-5.29), and not having a yearly women's checkup (PR: 1.31, 95% CI: 1.01-1.68) were significantly associated with nonuse of preferred method. Compared to preferred-method nonusers, higher proportions of preferred-method users reported consistent contraceptive use (89% vs. 73%, p < 0.001) and intent to continue use (79% vs. 58%, p < 0.001)., Conclusions: Affordability and poor provider satisfaction related to contraceptive care were associated with nonuse of preferred contraceptive method. Those using their preferred method reported more consistent use., Implications: Cost is an important barrier for women in obtaining their preferred contraceptive methods. Low quality birth control care may also be a barrier to preferred-method use. Removal of cost barriers and improvement in contraceptive counseling strategies may increase access to preferred contraceptive methods., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objective: Single-visit intrauterine device (IUD) insertion protocols are recommended. We assessed the availability of single-visit IUD insertions, and whether access to these services varies by age, race or parity., Study Design: Using audit study methodology, we called a random sample of 396 obstetrician-gynecology practices in Ohio while posing as a potential client seeking an IUD insertion appointment. Callers used eight standardized scripts and noted justifications for protocols offered by clinic staff. Practices were randomized to follow a balanced 3×2 factorial design, whereby practices were assigned to one of two conditions: (1) age (18 vs. 30 years of age); (2) race (white vs. black); and (3) parity. Multivariable logistic regression was used to control for clinics rural vs. urban location while considering the effects of these variables on service provision., Results: Almost all (95%) of the practices called offered IUD placement, of which 92% required multiple appointments for IUD insertion. Although access to single-visit IUD services did not vary by age or race, we found that parity was associated with clinics' willingness to schedule a single-visit insertion visit (OR = 3.84, 95% CI = 1.23, 12.04). The most frequent justification provided by clinic staff for their multiple-appointment protocol was the need to verify insurance coverage or order the device directly through the patient's insurance company., Conclusion: Ohio patients seeking IUD placement must typically make more than one clinic visit., Implications: Efforts are needed to reassure Ohio clinics that IUDs are routinely covered by insurers and to increase access to same-day IUD placement for women in Ohio, as the requirement to attend multiple clinics appointments to obtain a desired contraceptive may pose an insurmountable barrier to care for those with the fewest resources., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Prenatal care provided by midwives provides a safe and cost-effective alternative to care provided by physicians. However, no studies have evaluated the frequency of women who leave midwifery care, in a hospital setting. Our study objectives were to measure the frequency of transfers of care to physicians, to describe the sociodemographic and pregnancy-related characteristics of women who transferred to the care of a physician during prenatal care and at delivery, and to assess correlates of these transfers., Methods: We used electronic medical records to perform a retrospective cohort study of women who delivered at The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center (OSUWMC) and had at least one prenatal care visit within OSUWMC's network. We report descriptive findings, using proportions and means with standard deviations. We used logistic regression, with Firth's bias correction as necessary, to assess correlates of transferring to a physician during prenatal care and at delivery., Results: Most women who initiated prenatal care with a midwife remained in midwifery care throughout delivery, with 4.7% transferring to a physician during prenatal care, and an additional 21.4% transferring to a physician during delivery. After adjusting for pregnancy-related factors, the black race was statistically significantly associated with leaving midwifery care during prenatal care (adjusted odds ratio AOR 3.0 [95% CI 1.4-6.6]) and delivery (AOR 2.5 [95% CI 1.5-4.3])., Conclusion: Findings indicate that most women remain in midwifery care throughout pregnancy, but raise important questions with respect to the possible role that race has in pregnancy care., (© 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)