Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Dec 15;18(12):e0296009.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0296009. eCollection 2023.

Analysis of uterine evacuation methods in postabortion care after implementation of a surveillance network (CLAP MUSA-Network) at a university hospital

Nelio N Veiga-Junior  1 , Caroline Eugeni  1 , Beatriz D Kajiura  1 , Priscilla B F Dantas  1 , Caroline B Trabach  1 , Aline A Junqueira  1 , Carina C Nunes  1 , Luiz F Baccaro  1
Affiliations

Analysis of uterine evacuation methods in postabortion care after implementation of a surveillance network (CLAP MUSA-Network) at a university hospital

Nelio N Veiga-Junior et al. PLoS One. .

Abstract

Background: Management of uterine evacuation is essential for increasing safe abortion care. Monitoring through surveillance systems tracks changes in clinical practice and provides information to improve equity in abortion care quality.

Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the frequency of manual vacuum aspiration (MVA) and medical abortion (MA), and identify the factors associated with each uterine evacuation method after surveillance network installation at a Brazilian hospital.

Methods: This cross-sectional study included women admitted for abortion or miscarriage to the University of Campinas Women's Hospital, Brazil, between July 2017 and November 2020. The dependent variables were the use of MVA and MA with misoprostol. The independent variables were the patients' clinical and sociodemographic data. The Cochran-Armitage, chi-square, and Mann-Whitney U tests, as well as multiple logistic regression analysis, were used to compare uterine evacuation methods.

Results: We enrolled 474 women in the study, 91.35% of whom underwent uterine evacuation via uterine curettage (78.75%), MVA (9.46%), or MA (11.54%). MVA use increased during the study period (Z = 9.85, p < 0.001). Admission in 2020 (odds ratio [OR] 64.22; 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.79-1086.69) and lower gestational age (OR 0.837; 95% CI 0.724-0.967) were independently associated with MVA, whereas the only factor independently associated with MA was a higher education level (OR 2.66; 95% CI 1.30-5.46).

Conclusion: MVA use increased following the installation of a surveillance network for good clinical practice. Being part of a network that encourages the use of evidence-based methods provides an opportunity for healthcare facilities to increase access to safe abortions.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1. Methods of uterine evacuation between July 2017 and November 2020 by trimestral period.
Captions: MVA- manual vacuum aspiration; MA- medical abortion Cochran-Armitage test: MVA: Z = 9.85, P <0.001; MA: Z = 1.35; P = 0.178.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

References

    1. World Health Organization. Abortion care guideline Geneva: World Health Organization; 2022.
    1. Safe Abortion: Technical and Policy Guidance for Health Systems. 2nd ed. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2012. - PubMed
    1. Ganatra B, Gerdts C, Rossier C, et al.. Global, regional, andsubregional classification of abortions by safety, 2010–14: estimatesfrom a Bayesian hierarchical model. Lancet 2017; 390:2372–81. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(17)31794-4 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Diniz D, Medeiros M, Madeiro A. National Abortion Survey—Brazil, 2021. Cien Saude Colet. 2023 Jun;28(6):1601–1606. - PubMed
    1. Cardoso BB, Vieira FMSB, Saraceni V. Abortion in Brazil: what do the official data say?. Cad. Saúde Pública 2020; 36 (1): e00188718. - PubMed