» Articles » PMID: 29936150

Gestational Dating Using Last Menstrual Period and Bimanual Exam for Medication Abortion in Pharmacies and Health Centers in Nepal

Overview
Journal Contraception
Publisher Elsevier
Date 2018 Jun 25
PMID 29936150
Citations 3
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objective: To evaluate whether conducting a bimanual examination prior to medication abortion (MAB) provision results in meaningful changes in gestational age (GA) assessment after patient-reported last menstrual period (LMP) in Nepal.

Study Design: Women ages 16-45 (n=660) seeking MAB at twelve participating pharmacies and government health facilities, between October 2014 and September 2015, self-reported LMP. Trained auxiliary nurse midwives assessed GA using a bimanual exam after recording LMP. We compared GA assessments as measured via patient-reported LMP alone versus via LMP plus bimanual exam.

Results: Overall, 660 women (326 at pharmacies, 334 at health facilities) presented for MAB, and 95% were able to provide an LMP. Overall agreement between LMP alone and LMP with bimanual exam was 99.3%. If LMP alone had been used without bimanual exam, fewer than one in 200 women would have been given MAB beyond the legal gestational limit. Among the three women who were ≤63 days by LMP but >63 days by bimanual exam, only one would have received MAB beyond 70 days gestation. Fewer than one in 600 women would not have received MAB care when eligible by adding a bimanual exam.

Conclusion: There was high agreement between LMP alone and LMP plus bimanual exam. Routine bimanual exam may not be essential for safe and effective MAB care for women who are able to report an LMP. Removing the bimanual exam requirement could decrease barriers to provision outside of currently approved clinical settings and allow for expanded abortion access through provision by providers without bimanual exam training or facilities.

Implications: Routine bimanual exams may not be essential for safe medication abortion provision by trained clinicians in pharmacies and health facilities in low resource settings like Nepal.

Citing Articles

The Association Between Self-Managed versus Clinician-Managed Abortion and Self-Reported Abortion Complications: A Cross-Sectional Analysis in India.

Goemans S, Singh A, Yadav A, McDougal L, Raj A, Averbach S Int J Womens Health. 2023; 15:1467-1473.

PMID: 37795194 PMC: 10545903. DOI: 10.2147/IJWH.S414599.


Predictors of prior unsuccessful pharmacy abortion attempts among women presenting for abortion in government certified clinics in Nepal.

Ahlbach C, Puri M, Daniel S, Rocca C, Karki S, Foster D Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2022; 159(1):160-165.

PMID: 35152426 PMC: 9372217. DOI: 10.1002/ijgo.14141.


Medical abortion offered in pharmacy versus clinic-based settings.

Rodriguez M, Edelman A, Hersh A, Gartoulla P, Henderson J Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021; 6:CD013566.

PMID: 34114643 PMC: 8193989. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013566.pub2.

References
1.
Tamang A, Puri M, Masud S, Karki D, Khadka D, Singh M . Medical abortion can be provided safely and effectively by pharmacy workers trained within a harm reduction framework: Nepal. Contraception. 2017; 97(2):137-143. DOI: 10.1016/j.contraception.2017.09.004. View

2.
Samandari G, Wolf M, Basnett I, Hyman A, Andersen K . Implementation of legal abortion in Nepal: a model for rapid scale-up of high-quality care. Reprod Health. 2012; 9:7. PMC: 3373381. DOI: 10.1186/1742-4755-9-7. View

3.
Raymond E, Bracken H . Early medical abortion without prior ultrasound. Contraception. 2015; 92(3):212-4. DOI: 10.1016/j.contraception.2015.04.008. View

4.
Nichols M, Morgan E, Jensen J . Comparing bimanual pelvic examination to ultrasound measurement for assessment of gestational age in the first trimester of pregnancy. J Reprod Med. 2002; 47(10):825-8. View

5.
Blanchard K, Cooper D, Dickson K, Cullingworth L, Mavimbela N, Von Mollendorf C . A comparison of women's, providers' and ultrasound assessments of pregnancy duration among termination of pregnancy clients in South Africa. BJOG. 2007; 114(5):569-75. DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2007.01293.x. View