PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - Johnston, Heidi B
AU  - Gallo, Maria F
AU  - Benson, Janie
TI  - Reducing the costs to health systems of unsafe abortion: a comparison of four strategies
AID  - 10.1783/147118907782101751
DP  - 2007 Oct 01
TA  - Journal of Family Planning and Reproductive Health Care
PG  - 250--257
VI  - 33
IP  - 4
4099  - http://jfprhc.bmj.com/content/33/4/250.short
4100  - http://jfprhc.bmj.com/content/33/4/250.full
SO  - J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care2007 Oct 01; 33
AB  - Background and methodology Strategies to reduce health systems costs of providing abortion and post-abortion care while simultaneously improving quality of care are well documented but infrequently applied. We created ‘Savings’, a spreadsheet-based tool that allows policymakers and other stakeholders to estimate and compare the feasibility and sustainability of different strategies of providing abortion and post-abortion care. By applying cost data primarily from Uganda, we showed the per-case costs under four policy and service delivery scenarios. Results The mean per-case cost of abortion care (in US dollars) was #45 within the setting that placed heavy restrictions on elective abortion and used a conventional approach to service delivery; #25 within the restrictive legal setting that used recommended interventions for treating complications; #34 within the legal setting that allowed elective abortion and relied on a conventional approach to service delivery; and #6 within the liberal legal setting that used recommended interventions. Discussion and conclusions Using recommended technical interventions substantially reduced costs regardless of the legal setting. The greatest reduction in costs (86%) occurred from using recommended interventions within a liberal legal setting rather than using conventional interventions within a restricted setting. These findings should support policy and practice efforts to reform abortion laws and to offer accessible, safe abortion services.