Initial Impacts of Texas Senate Bill 8 on Abortions in Texas and at Out-of-State Facilities

This research brief from TxPEP describes changes in the number of abortions provided in Texas during the first 30 days that SB8 was in effect. It also reports wait times until the next available appointment at out-of-state facilities in September 2021. Wait times serve as a measure of facility capacity to meet patient demand and are an important indicator of access for time-sensitive health care, such as abortion.

The effect of obesity and low-dose oral contraceptives on carbohydrate and lipid metabolism

Combination oral contraceptives (OCs) have little effect on carbohydrate and lipid metabolism in normal-weight women. Based on lack of change in intermediate markers, as well as results of epidemiologic studies, low-dose OCs do not increase the risk of diabetes or cardiovascular disease. Obesity is a risk factor for impaired glucose tolerance, diabetes and coronary artery disease, and most previous OC studies excluded these women; thus, we have limited information about carbohydrate and lipid metabolism in obese OC users. This study compared changes in carbohydrate and lipid parameters in 71 normal-weight and 38 obese women initiating the OC. Women were randomized to two pills: 30 mcg ethinyl estradiol (EE)/150 mcg levonorgestrel (LNG) or 20 mcg EE/100 mcg LNG. Participants underwent baseline and cycle-3 measurements of fasting serum glucose; insulin; triglycerides and total, low-density lipoprotein (LDL) and high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol. Normal-weight and obese participants experienced similar changes in mean glucose, insulin and log homeostatic model assessment, as well as similar changes in total cholesterol, HDL and triglycerides; however, change in mean LDL (−4.9±20.6 mg/dL vs. +3.8±17.3 mg/dL) was different between the obese and normal-weight groups, respectively. Among the obese participants, change in glucose was marginally greater with the higher dose pill (p=.06); otherwise, changes between the body mass index groups were not modified by pill dose. Obesity had little effect on any OC-induced changes in carbohydrate or lipid metabolism except for a borderline adverse interaction between obesity and OC dose with respect to fasting glucose and a positive interaction between obesity and OC use with respect to LDL cholesterol

Abortion Access and Medically Complex Pregnancies Before and After Texas Senate Bill 8

Objective: To evaluate how Texas health care professionals who care for patients experiencing medically complex pregnancies navigate abortion restrictions. Methods: We conducted qualitative in-depth interviews with health care professionals across Texas who cared for patients with life-limiting fetal diagnoses or who had existing or developed health conditions that adversely affected pregnancy. We conducted the first round of interviews March-June 2021 and the second round of interviews January-May 2022 after the implementation of Texas Senate Bill 8 (SB8), which prohibited most abortions after detection of embryonic cardiac activity. We used inductive and deductive qualitative analysis to identify themes and changes in practice after the implementation of SB8. Results: We conducted a total of 50 interviews: 25 before implementation of SB8 and 25 after the law\u27s implementation. We interviewed 21 maternal-fetal medicine specialists, 19 obstetrician-gynecologists, eight physicians whose primary practice is the provision of abortion care, and two genetic counselors. Participants reported presenting their patients with information about health risks and outcomes of continued pregnancy in each policy period; however, counseling on these options was curtailed after implementation of SB8. Even in cases in which a patient\u27s health and, in some cases, life would be compromised, narrow criteria for abortions at hospitals limited care before implementation of SB8, and criteria often became more stringent after implementation of SB8. Administrative approval processes and referrals for abortion delayed care and endangered patients\u27 health, which worsened after in-state options were eliminated after implementation of SB8. Participants noted that patients with more limited resources who were unable to travel out of state often had to continue pregnancies, further increasing their risk of morbidity. Conclusion: Texas health care professionals\u27 abilities to provide evidence-based abortion care to patients with medically complex pregnancies were constrained by institutional policies, and care options narrowed further after implementation of SB8. Abortion restrictions limit shared decision making, compromise patient care, and put pregnant people\u27s health at risk

Abortion patients\u27 decision making about where to obtain out-of-state care following Texas\u27 2021 abortion ban

Objective: To assess pregnant Texans\u27 decisions about where to obtain out-of-state abortion care following the September 2021 implementation of Senate Bill 8 (SB8), which prohibited abortions after detectable embryonic cardiac activity. Data source: In-depth telephone interviews with Texas residents ≥15 years of age who obtained out-of-state abortion care after SB8\u27s implementation. Study design: This qualitative study explored participants\u27 experiences identifying and contacting abortion facilities and their concerns and considerations about traveling out of state. We used inductive and deductive codes in our thematic analysis describing people\u27s decisions about where to obtain care and how they evaluated available options. Data collection: Texas residents self-referred to the study from flyers we provided to abortion facilities in Arkansas, Colorado, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, New Mexico, and Oklahoma. We also enrolled participants from a concurrent online survey of Texans seeking abortion care. Principal findings: Participants (n = 65) frequently obtained referral lists for out-of-state locations from health-care providers, and a few received referrals to specific facilities; however, referrals rarely included the information people needed to decide where to obtain care. More than half of the participants prioritized getting the soonest appointment and often contacted multiple locations and traveled further to do so; others who could not travel further typically waited longer for an appointment. Although the participants rarely cited state abortion restrictions or cost of care as their main reason for choosing a location, they often made sacrifices to lessen the logistical and economic hardships that state restrictions and out-of-state travel costs created. Informative abortion facility websites and compassionate scheduling staff solidified some participants\u27 facility choice. Conclusions: Pregnant Texans made difficult trade-offs and experienced travel-related burdens to obtain out-of-state abortion care. As abortion bans prohibit more people from obtaining in-state care, efforts to strengthen patient navigation are needed to reduce care-seeking burdens as this will support people\u27s reproductive autonomy

Association of Texas’ 2021 Ban on Abortion in Early Pregnancy With the Number of Facility-Based Abortions in Texas and Surrounding States

Importance Texas’ 2021 ban on abortion in early pregnancy may demonstrate how patterns of abortion might change following the US Supreme Court’s June 2022 decision overturning Roe v Wade. Objective To assess changes in the number of abortions and changes in the percentage of out-of-state abortions among Texas residents performed at 12 or more weeks of gestation in the first 6 months following implementation of Texas Senate Bill 8 (SB 8), which prohibited abortions after detection of embryonic cardiac activity. Design, Setting, and Participants Retrospective study of a sample of 50 Texas and out-of-state abortion facilities using an interrupted time series analysis to assess changes in the number of abortions, and Poisson regression to assess changes in abortions at 12 or more weeks of gestation. Data included 68 820 Texas facility–based abortions and 11 287 out-of-state abortions among Texas residents during the study period from September 1, 2020, to February 28, 2022. Exposures Abortion care obtained after (September 2021–February 2022) vs before (September 2020–August 2021) implementation of SB 8. Main Outcomes and Measures Primary outcomes were changes in the number of facility-based abortions for Texas residents, in Texas and out of state, in the month after implementation of SB 8 compared with the month before. The secondary outcome was the change in the percentage of out-of-state abortions among Texas residents obtained at 12 or more weeks of gestation during the 6-month period after the law’s implementation. Results Between September 2020 and August 2021, there were 55 018 abortions in Texas and 2547 out-of-state abortions among Texas residents. During the 6 months after SB 8, there were 13 802 abortions in Texas and 8740 out-of-state abortions among Texas residents. Compared with the month before implementation of SB 8, the number of Texas facility–based abortions significantly decreased from 5451 to 2169 (difference, −3282 [95% CI, −3171 to −3396]; incidence rate ratio [IRR], 0.43 [95% CI, 0.36-0.51]) in the month after SB 8 was implemented. The number of out-of-state abortions among Texas residents significantly increased from 222 to 1332 (difference, 1110 [95% CI, 1047-1177]; IRR, 5.38 [95% CI, 4.19-6.91]). Overall, the total documented number of Texas facility–based and out-of-state abortions among Texas residents significantly decreased from 5673 to 3501 (absolute change, −2172 [95% CI, −2083 to −2265]; IRR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.56-0.79]) in the first month after SB 8 was implemented compared with the previous month. Out-of-state abortions among Texas residents obtained at 12 or more weeks of gestation increased from 17.1% (221/1291) to 31.0% (399/1289) (difference, 178 [95% CI, 153-206]) during the period between September 2021 and February 2022 (P \u3c .001 for trend). Conclusions and Relevance Among a sample of abortion facilities, the 2021 Texas law banning abortion in early pregnancy (SB 8) was significantly associated with a decrease in the documented total of facility-based abortions in Texas and obtained by Texas residents in surrounding states in the first month after implementation compared with the previous month. Over the 6 months following SB 8 implementation, the percentage of out-of-state abortions among Texas residents obtained at 12 or more weeks of gestation significantly increased

Texas’ 2021 Ban on Abortion in Early Pregnancy Was Associated with a Decrease in Abortions in Texas, an Increase in Abortions Out of State, and a Decrease in Overall Abortions

Texas Senate Bill 8 (SB 8) made abortions illegal once embryonic cardiac activity (sometimes incorrectly referred to as a “fetal heartbeat”) can be detected (at about 5-6 weeks of pregnancy), with very limited exceptions. Before SB 8, abortions could be provided in Texas up to 22 weeks of pregnancy. SB 8 was the most restrictive abortion law in the US until June 2022 when the US Supreme Court overturned the Roe v. Wade decision, which allowed Texas to enforce a law that prohibits almost all abortions. In this study, Kari White, PRC faculty scholar and principal investigator of the Texas Policy Evaluation Project (TxPEP), along with PRC and TxPEP researchers Gracia Sierra, Klaira Lerma, Vinita Goyal, and professor emeritus Joseph Potter, and colleagues, compared the abortions Texas residents had in the month before and month after SB 8 went into effect. They also calculated the proportion of abortions that were done out of state for people who were 12 or more weeks pregnant in the six months after the law went into effect, compared to the same six-month period the year before. They found that SB 8 was associated with a decrease in abortions in Texas, an increase in abortions out of state, a decrease in overall abortions, and an increase in abortions after 12 weeks of pregnancy.Population Research Cente

Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine Consult Series #59: The use of analgesia and anesthesia for maternal-fetal procedures.

Pain is a complex phenomenon that involves more than a simple physical response to external stimuli. In maternal-fetal surgical procedures, fetal analgesia is used primarily to blunt fetal autonomic responses and minimize fetal movement. The purpose of this Consult is to review the literature on what is known about the potential for fetal awareness of pain and to discuss the indications for and the risk-benefit calculus involved in the use of fetal anesthesia and analgesia. The recommendations by the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine are as follows: (1) we suggest that fetal paralytic agents be considered in the setting of intrauterine transfusion, if needed, for the purpose of decreasing fetal movement (GRADE 2C); (2) although the fetus is unable to experience pain at the gestational age when procedures are typically performed, we suggest that opioid analgesia should be administered to the fetus during invasive fetal surgical procedures to attenuate acute autonomic responses that may be deleterious, avoid long-term consequences of nociception and physiological stress on the fetus, and decrease fetal movement to enable the safe execution of procedures (GRADE 2C); and (3) due to maternal risk and a lack of evidence supporting benefit to the fetus, we recommend against the administration of fetal analgesia at the time of pregnancy termination (GRADE 1C)

Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine Consult Series #59: The use of analgesia and anesthesia for maternal-fetal procedures.

Pain is a complex phenomenon that involves more than a simple physical response to external stimuli. In maternal-fetal surgical procedures, fetal analgesia is used primarily to blunt fetal autonomic responses and minimize fetal movement. The purpose of this Consult is to review the literature on what is known about the potential for fetal awareness of pain and to discuss the indications for and the risk-benefit calculus involved in the use of fetal anesthesia and analgesia. The recommendations by the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine are as follows: (1) we suggest that fetal paralytic agents be considered in the setting of intrauterine transfusion, if needed, for the purpose of decreasing fetal movement (GRADE 2C); (2) although the fetus is unable to experience pain at the gestational age when procedures are typically performed, we suggest that opioid analgesia should be administered to the fetus during invasive fetal surgical procedures to attenuate acute autonomic responses that may be deleterious, avoid long-term consequences of nociception and physiological stress on the fetus, and decrease fetal movement to enable the safe execution of procedures (GRADE 2C); and (3) due to maternal risk and a lack of evidence supporting benefit to the fetus, we recommend against the administration of fetal analgesia at the time of pregnancy termination (GRADE 1C)