Medication and procedural abortion uptake during a period of increasing abortion hostility

Abstract

Hundreds of state-level abortion restrictions were implemented in the US between 2010 and 2020. Medication abortion was being widely adopted during this same period. Understanding the impact of health policies and political climate will improve the delivery of and access to reproductive healthcare in a period of rapid change. To measure the association between state abortion hostility and mifepristone and procedural abortion rates, we conducted a state-level repeated cross-sectional study using 2010–2020 employer-sponsored insurance claims data from Merative MarketScan. The exposure of interest was a 13-point state-level abortion hostility score based on the presence of policies which either reduce or protect access to abortion. Outcomes of interest were annual mifepristone and procedural abortion claims per 100,000 enrollees. We used a linear mixed model adjusting for urbanicity, age group, and year. We assessed whether temporal trends in abortion claims were modified by state abortion hostility by interacting year with two measurements of abortion hostility: baseline score in 2010 and change from baseline score. We found that median state-level mifepristone claims increased from 20 to 37 per 100,000 included enrollees; meanwhile, median procedural abortions claims decreased from 69 to 20 per 100. For mifepristone, every unit increase in a state's baseline abortion hostility score was associated with 7.5 (CI, −12 to −3.6) fewer mifepristone claims per 100,000 in 2010. For states with baseline hostility and change scores of zero, we did not observe a significant time trend over the 11 year study period. For every unit increase in baseline hostility, the time trend changed by 0.5 fewer claims (CI, −0.8 to −0.2) per 100,000 per year. States with higher baseline abortion hostility had fewer overall abortions, less uptake of mifepristone abortions, and slower decline in procedural abortions between 2010 and 2020. Changes in hostility from new restrictions during this time period did not significantly impact claims. Advocates for abortion access must simultaneously attend to individual abortion policies and the overall political climate. Updated research on the relationship between political climate and the evolving clinical landscape of abortion care is needed to inform this work.