Back

Conducting a survey of abortion-related knowledge, attitudes and practices amongst health professionals in Britain, strategies adopted and lessons learned: evidence from the SACHA Study

French, R. S.; Palmer, M. J.; McCarthy, O.; Salaria, N.; Meiksin, R.; Shawe, J.; Scott, R.; Wellings, K. S.

2024-04-19 sexual and reproductive health
10.1101/2024.04.19.24306065 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundMost 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. MethodsA 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. ResultsOverall, 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%). ConclusionsObtaining 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.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Health Expectations
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
12.8%
2
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 17%
10.4%
3
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 2%
10.4%
4
PLOS Global Public Health
293 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
10.4%
5
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
20 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
7.1%
50% of probability mass above
6
International Journal of Epidemiology
74 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
5.0%
7
Social Science & Medicine
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.5%
8
European Journal of Human Genetics
49 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
3.7%
9
PLOS Medicine
98 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.8%
10
Peer Community Journal
254 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.1%
11
Nature Human Behaviour
85 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.8%
12
SSM - Population Health
17 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.8%
13
British Journal of General Practice
22 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.8%
14
Frontiers in Public Health
140 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.8%
15
BMC Health Services Research
42 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.7%
16
BMC Infectious Diseases
118 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.4%
17
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 65%
1.3%
18
BMJ Global Health
98 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.3%
19
Sexually Transmitted Infections
21 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
0.9%
20
Wellcome Open Research
57 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
21
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B
51 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.8%
22
Pilot and Feasibility Studies
12 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.7%
23
PLOS Digital Health
91 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.7%
24
Archives of Clinical and Biomedical Research
28 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.5%
25
BJGP Open
12 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.5%