Abstract
Background Most surveys examining health professionals’ knowledge, attitudes and practices around abortion have used convenience samples and have targeted doctors. Our goal in the SACHA Study, drawing on evidence-based strategies to maximise response rates, was to achieve a representative sample of a wider range of health professionals, working in general practice, maternity services, pharmacies, sexual and reproductive health (SRH) clinics and specialist abortion services in Britain, to explore the knowledge, attitudes and experience of abortion care and views on future models of delivery.
Methods A cross-sectional questionnaire-based survey of midwives, doctors, nurses and pharmacists in England, Scotland and Wales was undertaken between November, 2021 and July, 2022. We used a stratified cluster sampling approach to select a random sample of sites and all eligible staff within those services were asked to respond to the survey. Evidence-based strategies to maximise completion rates were adopted, including postal delivery of the one-page questionnaire with personal letter of invitation and a stamped address envelope for return, inclusion of an unconditional voucher and follow-up.
Results Overall, 147 of the 314 (46.8%) health service sites randomly selected took part in the survey. Reasons for non-participation included local Research and Development (R&D) Department non-response, lack of resources or insufficient time to support or approve the study, lack of interest in or perceived relevance of the topic and insufficient capacity to take part, exacerbated by work demands during the COVID epidemic. Of the 1370 questionnaires sent to eligible identified participants within these services, 771 were completed and returned (56.3%). At the service level the highest proportion of returns was from SRH clinics (81.0%) and the lowest from general practice (32.4%). In relation to profession, returns were highest amongst midwives (69.6%) and lowest amongst pharmacists (36.5%).
Conclusions Obtaining information about health professional knowledge, attitudes and practices is key to guide service development and policy and to identify gaps in training and service provision in abortion. Despite our attempts to gain a representative sample of health professionals, the challenges we experienced limited the representativeness of the sample, despite the use of an evidence-based strategy.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study is funded by the NIHR [HSDR Project: NIHR129529]. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Approval for the survey was received from NHS Health Research Authority (IRAS Approval ID 297849), the LSHTM Ethics Committee (LSHTM Ethics Ref 26332), BPAS Research and Ethics Committee (reference number: 2021/08/FRE) and MSI Ethics Review Committee (application number 009-21).
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
Survey data is not available as noted in Data Protection Impact Assessment. Study materials are available on request to the research team.
List of abbreviations
- BPAS
- British Pregnancy Advisory Service
- GPs
- General Practitioners
- NUPAS
- National Unplanned Pregnancy Advisory Service
- PIC
- Participant Identification Centre
- R&D
- Research & Development
- RCGP
- Royal College of General Practitioners
- RCOG
- Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists
- SACHA
- Shaping Abortion for Change
- SRH
- Sexual & Reproductive Health
