View clinical trials related to Induced Abortion.
Filter by:With sensitive urine pregnancy tests, women are now able to confirm very early pregnancies. However, approximately one third of abortion facilities do not offer abortions at less than six weeks of pregnancy. Providers may be concerned that they will be unable to identify products of conception (POCs) in uterine aspirates after early abortion and about the time, cost and risk associated with following serum hCG levels when completed abortion cannot be confirmed by gross inspection. Many providers believe that manual vacuum aspiration (MVA) causes less destruction of pregnancy tissue and therefore may increase the likelihood of identifying POCs on gross inspection. No published reports specifically compare MVA to electric vacuum aspiration (EVA) for the detection of complete products of conception and none compare MVA and EVA at less than 6 weeks of pregnancy. We, the investigators, propose to conduct a randomized controlled trial comparing the sensitivity of MVA to EVA for the detection of completed abortion in 500 women with pregnancies of less than 6 weeks gestation at a large inner city family planning center. We will measure positive identification of POCs on gross inspection in patients subsequently shown to have completed abortions. We hypothesize that the rate of true positive detection of POCs will be higher in dilation and curettage (D&C) using MVA than EVA.
The purpose of our study is to determine the optimum route for the injection of digoxin prior to second-trimester surgical abortion.
The purpose of this study is to determine the expulsion and continuation rate of an intruterine device (IUD) placed immediately after medical abortion. Our hypothesis is that immediate-placement of an IUD after completed medical abortion will have a similar expulsion and continuation rate to traditional placement (4-6 weeks after pregnancy).
To assess the feasibility of using simplified telephone follow-up to predict pregnancy expulsion after medical abortion, and if in-person follow-up is required to determine the percentage of women that will present for that follow-up.
This is a randomized, single-blind study using oxytocin 5U i.v. during surgical abortion in one arm of the study, and no medication in the other arm of the study. Comparison is done between the two groups measuring the following outcomes: pain, nausea and blood loss. The investigators' hypothesis is that there will be no significant differences between the two groups.
This double-blind, randomized study will compare the efficacy and acceptability of mifepristone 200mg followed in 36-48 hours by 400mcg or 800mcg of buccal misoprostol (i.e., in the cheeks) for termination of pregnancy in women up to 63 days LMP.
The hypothesis of the study is that the induction abortion interval time will be significantly shorter in the group receiving vaginal misoprostol every six hours in comparison to the group who are receiving vaginal misoprostol every twelve hours.
The purpose of this study is to compare two methods of pregnancy termination on the time to delivery in the second trimester.
This open-label, randomized study is being conducted to determine whether a dose of 400 mcg of sublingual misoprostol (i.e., under the tongue) taken 24 hours following administration of mifepristone 200 mg is effective and acceptable at inducing an abortion compared with misoprostol taken orally. The goal of this study is to provide answers to the following four questions: 1. Is a regimen of medical abortion with mifepristone using sublingual misoprostol at least as effective as using oral misoprostol up to 63 days since the last menstrual period (LMP)? 2. Are the side effects with sublingual use tolerable for women? 3. Is sublingual administration of misoprostol acceptable to women? 4. Is one of the regimens (sublingual or oral) superior in terms of efficacy, safety (side-effects) or acceptability?