Abstract:Background: Most obstetric emergencies are initially managed in the emergency department (ED). The Supreme Court decision of Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, overturning Roe v. Wade, in June 2022, eliminated constitutional protection of abortion rights, allowing states to swiftly enact laws that can greatly change reproductive medicine. In this post-Roe landscape, the ambiguity and uncertainty being imposed on clinicians regarding the legality of certain interventions may have catastrophic effects. To understand and plan for the changes that will come and attempt to mitigate adverse outcomes, the authors first assessed the current state of pregnancy-related complication care in the ED setting. This study utilized data obtained from the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NHAMCS) to evaluate trends in pregnancy-related ED visits from 2016 to 2020 that could be impacted by restricted abortion access and trigger laws. The authors subsequently analyzed the legislative changes and translated the pertinent ones to dispel misunderstandings and provide a framework for appropriate medical practice. Methods: The retrospective study utilized data from the NHAMCS database from 2016 to 2020, encompassing an estimated total of 4,556,778 pregnancy-related ED visits. NHAMCS is a multi-stage probabilistic sample collected by the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) using an annual survey of EDs in the United States. All data were summarized using descriptive statistics such as proportions and 95% confidence intervals Furthermore, the supreme court decision was analyzed in addition to multiple state laws and legal texts. The findings were summarized and discussed. Results: The majority (79.4%) of all studied visits were for patients between the ages of 18-34 years, capturing those in peak reproductive years. This age group also comprised of the bulk (76.4%) of visits for pathologic pregnancies, including ectopic and molar pregnancies, and 79.8% of visits for a spontaneous miscarriage or threatened miscarriage in early pregnancy. Black patients accounted for 25.7%, white patients 70.1%. Regarding ethnicity, patients were separated into Hispanic and non-Hispanic, with Hispanic patients comprising 27% of all ED visits for included diagnoses between 2016 and 2020. Most visits for complications following an induced abortion occurred in the south (70.8%) and were nearly twice as likely to occur in non-metropolitan areas. Approximately 18% patients presenting with a pathologic pregnancy required admission to the hospital and approximately 50% of those visits for pathologic pregnancies and visits for bleeding in pregnancy had a procedure in the ED (49.8% and 49.5%). There were 111,264 estimated visits in which methotrexate was administered, amounting to approximately 1 in 7 visits for ectopic or molar pregnancy. In this data set, approximately 14,000 miscarriage and early bleeding patients received misoprostol. Conclusion: Pregnancy-related ED visits comprise of a significant proportion of emergency care. As it relates to many of the trends previously elucidated on, the true extent of the burden cannot be predicted. It must be emphasized that contrary to popular belief, Dobbs v. Jackson does not prohibit termination of pregnancy in the setting of life-threatening conditions to the mother, including ectopic pregnancy, preeclampsia, and others, but the resultant uncertainty and ambiguity surrounding the constitutional change is leading to an over-compliance of the law, necessarily obstructing reproductive health care. The authors recommend that physicians be mindful of the rapidly-evolving laws in their particular state, and to also practice in accordance with Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA). Patient safety must be prioritized.

The impact of the Roe v. Wade overturn on birth control prescriptions and sterilisation procedures in rural NC

Early national trends in non-abortion reproductive care access after Roe

From Roe to Dobbs: 50 Years of Cause and Effect of US State Abortion Regulations

Abortion incidence and service availability in the United States, 2020

A national analysis of ED presentations for early pregnancy and complications: Implications for post-Roe America

Distance Traveled for Abortion at a North Carolina Tertiary Care Center Following Restrictive Legislation

Public health and clinical implications of Dobbs v. Jackson for patients and healthcare providers: A scoping review

Navigating the Impact of the Dobbs Decision: Perspectives from Pediatric Surgeons on Reproductive Health Care

Attitudes, concerns, and perceptions of patients undergoing fertility treatments in an abortion restrictive state in the aftermath of the Roe v. Wade reversal

Cancer Care in Post-Roe America: How Do We Move Forward?

U.S. college students' perspectives on contraception and abortion post-Dobbs: the influence of socioeconomic privilege and gender inequity

105. Postpartum Contraception Access and Adherence in a Texas Adolescent Population Following the Dobbs Decision

Large Reductions in Cesarean Delivery Rates in China: a Qualitative Study on Delivery Decision-Making in the Era of the Two-Child Policy

The Impact of Changing Abortion Legislation on Emergency Medicine Residents in a State With Protected Abortion Rights

Provision of Medications for Self-Managed Abortion Before and After the Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization Decision

Adaptations to COVID-19 by US abortion clinics: analysis of Society of Family Planning survey data

Banning abortion prevents us from providing safe care to all pregnant women

Post- Roe v Wade psychiatry: legal, clinical, and ethical challenges in psychiatry under abortion bans

124. The Birds and the Bees and COVID-19: Rates of Adolescent Contraceptives Prescribed in a Large Health System Pre- and Post-Pandemic

(382) Online Trends for Vasectomy Inquiries following Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization Supreme Court Decision

(383) Viewpoints of Patients Regarding Their Reasons for Undergoing a Vasectomy: Impact of the Dobbs vs. Jackson Women’s Health Organization Decision