Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Trainee Perspectives Regarding the Effect of the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization Supreme Court Decision on Obstetrics and Gynecology Training

  • Kate V. Meriwether
  • , Shunaha Kim-Fine
  • , Tova Ablove
  • , Arthur Ollendorff
  • , Lindsay E. Dale
  • , Jamie W. Krashin
  • , William D. Winkelman
  • , Francisco Orejuela
  • , Donna Mazloomdoost
  • , Cara L. Grimes
  • , A. Jenna Beckham
  • , Katie Propst
  • , Maria E. Florian-Rodriguez
  • , Jema K. Turk
  • , Olivia H. Chang
  • , Sarah Horvath
  • , Stephanie T. Ros
  • , Catrina C. Crisp
  • , Timothy R. Petersen
  • , Cheryl B. Iglesia
  • University of New Mexico
  • University of Calgary
  • Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University
  • Maine Medical Center
  • Harvard University
  • Baylor College of Medicine
  • INOVA Fairfax Hospital
  • New York Medical College
  • WakeMed
  • University of South Florida
  • University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center
  • University of California at San Francisco
  • University of California at Irvine
  • Pennsylvania State University
  • Good Samaritan Hospital Cincinnati
  • Washington Hospital Center

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

5 Scopus citations

Abstract

Objectives: We aimed to describe obstetrics and gynecology (OBGYN) trainees’ anticipation of how the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (Dobbs) U.S. Supreme Court decision may affect their training. Methods: A REDCap survey of OBGYN residents and fellows in the United States from September 19, 2022, to December 1, 2022, queried trainees’ anticipated achievement of relevant Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) training milestones, their concerns about the ability to provide care and concern about legal repercussions during training, and the importance of OBGYN competence in managing certain clinical situations for residency graduates. The primary outcome was an ACGME program trainee feeling uncertain or unable to obtain the highest level queried for a relevant ACGME milestone, including experiencing 20 abortion procedures in residency. Results: We received 469 eligible responses; the primary outcome was endorsed by 157 respondents (33.5%). After correction for confounders, significant predictors of the primary outcome were state environment (aOR = 3.94 for pending abortion restrictions; aOR = 2.71 for current abortion restrictions), trainee type (aOR = 0.21 for fellow vs. resident), and a present or past Ryan Training Program in residency (aOR = 0.55). Although the vast majority of trainees believed managing relevant clinical situations are key to OBGYN competence, 10%–30% of trainees believed they would have to stop providing the standard of care in clinical situations during training. Conclusions: This survey of OBGYN trainees indicates higher uncertainty about achieving ACGME milestones and procedural competency in clinical situations potentially affected by the Dobbs decision in states with legal restrictions on abortion.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)908-915
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of Women's Health
Volume33
Issue number7
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 1 2024

Keywords

  • Dobbs
  • ROE
  • abortion
  • competency
  • family planning
  • training

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Trainee Perspectives Regarding the Effect of the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization Supreme Court Decision on Obstetrics and Gynecology Training'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this