Journal of the American Medical Women's Association (1972) · 2000
Experiences and satisfaction with providing methotrexate-induced abortions among US providers.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Harvey S M, Beckman L J, Satre S J
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: This study examined the acceptability of and experiences with methotrexate as an abortifacient among health care providers in the United States.
METHODS: Seventy-six telephone interviews were conducted with providers (28% physicians, 13% midlevel providers, 29% administrators, and 30% counselors/other medical staff) of methotrexate-induced abortions during May and June of 1997. We examined provider satisfaction and several key operational issues relative to medical abortion, including: time spent with patients and staffing, training, and space needs.
RESULTS: The majority of providers agreed that overall, more time was spent with methotrexate than with surgical abortion patients. Most agreed that the number of staff needed was the same for both methods, and that methotrexate required less office space. There were differing views on whether methotrexate required more, an equal amount of, or less training than surgical. Overall, providers were satisfied with methotrexate as an abortifacient.
CONCLUSION: These data suggest that as knowledge of the method spreads, more providers will add this technique to their services.
METHODS: Seventy-six telephone interviews were conducted with providers (28% physicians, 13% midlevel providers, 29% administrators, and 30% counselors/other medical staff) of methotrexate-induced abortions during May and June of 1997. We examined provider satisfaction and several key operational issues relative to medical abortion, including: time spent with patients and staffing, training, and space needs.
RESULTS: The majority of providers agreed that overall, more time was spent with methotrexate than with surgical abortion patients. Most agreed that the number of staff needed was the same for both methods, and that methotrexate required less office space. There were differing views on whether methotrexate required more, an equal amount of, or less training than surgical. Overall, providers were satisfied with methotrexate as an abortifacient.
CONCLUSION: These data suggest that as knowledge of the method spreads, more providers will add this technique to their services.