Abortion Training in U.S. Obstetrics and Gynecology Residency Programs, 1998

Almeling, Rene; Tews, Laureen; Dudley, Susan E.

doi:10.2307/2648194

Cited by 53 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Other systems may not have the backing of prochoice leadership or the financial resources obtained through the Bloomberg abortion training initiative to enact changes in abortion training, limiting generalizability. Our findings, however, are in agreement with other studies conducted throughout the country 3,9,10 and are similar to qualitative inquiry related to abortion training in the context of family medicine residency programs. 14,15 We would also argue that NYC may represent a ''best-case'' scenario and that, at a minimum, the enablers and barriers we discovered must be considered.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Enablers of and Barriers to Abortion Training

Guiahi¹,

Lim²,

Westover³

et al. 2013

Journal of Graduate Medical Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Since the legalization of abortion services in the United States, provision of abortions has remained a controversial issue of high political interest. Routine abortion training is not offered at all obstetrics and gynecology (Ob-Gyn) training programs, despite a specific training requirement by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education. Previous studies that described Ob-Gyn programs with routine abortion training either examined associations by using national surveys of program directors or described the experience of a single program. Objective We set out to identify enablers of and barriers to Ob-Gyn abortion training in the context of a New York City political initiative, in order to better understand how to improve abortion training at other sites. Methods We conducted in-depth qualitative interviews with 22 stakeholders from 7 New York City public hospitals and focus group interviews with 62 current residents at 6 sites. Results Enablers of abortion training included program location, high-capacity services, faculty commitment to abortion training, external programmatic support, and resident interest. Barriers to abortion training included lack of leadership continuity, leadership conflict, lack of second-trimester abortion services, difficulty obtaining mifepristone, optional rather than routine training, and antiabortion values of hospital personnel. Conclusions Supportive leadership, faculty commitment, and external programmatic support appear to be key elements for establishing routine abortion training at Ob-Gyn residency training programs.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Enablers of and Barriers to Abortion Training

Guiahi¹,

Lim²,

Westover³

et al. 2013

Journal of Graduate Medical Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…More OB-GYN residency programs are including abortion training as a routine part of medical education (2). For example, all public hospitals offering OB-GYN residencies in New York City must now provide abortion training; California passed similar legislation in 2002 applying to state-supported residencies.…”

Section: Providers and Trainingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Abortion in the United States

Harper

Henderson

Darney

2005

Annu. Rev. Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

■ Abstract Abortion is an extremely safe and common medical procedure. In the United States, over one million women had an abortion in the year 2000. Advances in early abortion techniques have helped to increase the proportion of early procedures, the safest type. Abortion rates have been declining since the early nineties among adults and adolescents, but rates among poor, minority women remain high. State restrictions to abortion have a larger impact on poor women and young women. Restrictions and regulations have also resulted in the concentration of abortion services in specialized clinics. These clinics are subject to harassment. The expansion of abortion services to more types of providers could increase access, as well as integrate abortion into women's health care. LEGAL CHANGES AND STATE RESTRICTIONSSince the passage of Roe v. Wade in 1973, many legal challenges to abortion rights have been mounted. The 1992 decision Planned Parenthood v. Casey upheld the right to abortion but, at the same time, gave states the right to enact restrictions that do not create an "undue burden" for women seeking abortion. This decision encouraged numerous legal and regulatory restrictions on abortion. These restrictions tend to have a greater effect on women who are at the highest risk of unintended pregnancy, namely poor women and young women. The restrictions also often define the clinical settings where services can be delivered. State regulatory restrictions, including zoning rules, state licensing, and inspection requirements, explain the concentration of abortions in specialized abortion clinics (24).In addition to targeted regulations, abortion restrictions that impede access to services include state-mandated waiting periods and counseling topics, such as showing women sonographic or other images of fetal development, parental involvement for minors, and insurance restrictions. Although many states require some kind of counseling, five states (Louisiana, Mississippi, Utah, Wisconsin, and Indiana) require counseling in person at least 18 h before the procedure, which

show abstract

“…[5][6][7][8] A qualitative study that explored Ob-Gyn Conclusions Despite similar intentions to provide family planning procedures after graduation, residents at faithbased training programs were less satisfied with their family planning training and rate their ability to perform family planning services lower than residents at nonfaith-based training programs.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Training at a Faith-Based Institution Matters for Obstetrics and Gynecology Residents: Results From a Regional Survey

Guiahi¹,

Westhoff²,

Summers³

et al. 2013

Journal of Graduate Medical Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Prior data suggest that opportunities in family planning training may be limited during obstetrics and gynecology (Ob-Gyn) residency training, particularly at faith-based institutions with moral and ethical constraints, although this aspect of the Ob-Gyn curriculum has not been formally studied to date. Objectives We compared Ob-Gyn residents' self-rated competency and intentions to provide family planning procedures at faith-based versus those of residents at non-faith-based programs. Methods We surveyed residents at all 20 Ob-Gyn programs in Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, and Wisconsin from 2008 to 2009. Residents were queried about current skills and future plans to perform family planning procedures. We examined associations based on program and residents' personal characteristics and performed multivariable logistic regression analysis. Results A total of 232 of 340 residents (68%) from 17 programs (85%) returned surveys. Seven programs were faith-based. Residents from non-faith-based programs were more likely to be completely satisfied with family planning training (odds ratio [OR] = 3.4, 95% confidence limit [CI], 1.9–6.2) and to report they “understand and can perform on own” most procedures. Most residents, regardless of program type, planned to provide all surveyed family planning services. Conclusions Despite similar intentions to provide family planning procedures after graduation, residents at faith-based training programs were less satisfied with their family planning training and rate their ability to perform family planning services lower than residents at non-faith-based training programs.

show abstract

Abortion Training in U.S. Obstetrics and Gynecology Residency Programs, 1998

Cited by 53 publications

References 1 publication

Enablers of and Barriers to Abortion Training

Enablers of and Barriers to Abortion Training

Abortion in the United States

Training at a Faith-Based Institution Matters for Obstetrics and Gynecology Residents: Results From a Regional Survey

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About