- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Botched Abortions Put Thousands of Women in ERs, Wrongly Coded as Miscarriages
Posted on 5/29/25 at 12:01 pm
Posted on 5/29/25 at 12:01 pm
LINK
A new peer-reviewed study published by the Charlotte Lozier Institute (CLI) uncovered widespread miscoding of emergency room (ER) visits following drug-induced abortions, raising serious concerns about patient safety.
Using anonymized Medicaid claims data, researchers reviewed nearly 29,000 ER visits within 30 days of a surgical or drug-induced abortion. They then determined whether each visit was related to the abortion and whether it was accurately coded as abortion-related or misclassified as a miscarriage. Each case was also evaluated for acuity—which is a measure of the severity and complexity of each patient’s condition.
Key findings:
ER visits after abortion drug use were 79% more likely to be miscoded as miscarriages compared to surgical abortions.
From 2016–2021, nearly 84% of drug-induced abortion-related ER visits were miscoded.
Miscoded ER visits were significantly more likely to be severe: Among drug-induced abortion cases, miscoded visits were 50% more likely to be labeled high acuity over correctly coded visits.
“When abortion-related emergencies are disguised as miscarriages, it impairs a doctor’s ability to make informed, evidence-based decisions. That isn’t just a documentation error—it’s a public health crisis,” said Dr. James Studnicki, vice president and director of data analytics at the Charlotte Lozier Institute.
The findings are especially troubling considering pro-abortion advocacy groups actively encourage women to withhold their abortion history in emergency room settings. Currently, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) advises clinicians not to ask or document abortion drug use, citing concerns over legal risk—a claim not supported by state laws, which uniformly exempt women from any prosecution.
This guidance defies standard medical practice. In no other area of health care are patients told to lie or omit their critical medical history, especially in emergency scenarios where lives and outcomes rely on accurate information.
...
A new peer-reviewed study published by the Charlotte Lozier Institute (CLI) uncovered widespread miscoding of emergency room (ER) visits following drug-induced abortions, raising serious concerns about patient safety.
Using anonymized Medicaid claims data, researchers reviewed nearly 29,000 ER visits within 30 days of a surgical or drug-induced abortion. They then determined whether each visit was related to the abortion and whether it was accurately coded as abortion-related or misclassified as a miscarriage. Each case was also evaluated for acuity—which is a measure of the severity and complexity of each patient’s condition.
Key findings:
ER visits after abortion drug use were 79% more likely to be miscoded as miscarriages compared to surgical abortions.
From 2016–2021, nearly 84% of drug-induced abortion-related ER visits were miscoded.
Miscoded ER visits were significantly more likely to be severe: Among drug-induced abortion cases, miscoded visits were 50% more likely to be labeled high acuity over correctly coded visits.
“When abortion-related emergencies are disguised as miscarriages, it impairs a doctor’s ability to make informed, evidence-based decisions. That isn’t just a documentation error—it’s a public health crisis,” said Dr. James Studnicki, vice president and director of data analytics at the Charlotte Lozier Institute.
The findings are especially troubling considering pro-abortion advocacy groups actively encourage women to withhold their abortion history in emergency room settings. Currently, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) advises clinicians not to ask or document abortion drug use, citing concerns over legal risk—a claim not supported by state laws, which uniformly exempt women from any prosecution.
This guidance defies standard medical practice. In no other area of health care are patients told to lie or omit their critical medical history, especially in emergency scenarios where lives and outcomes rely on accurate information.
...
10
Posted on 5/29/25 at 12:02 pm to Night Vision
quote:
Botched Abortions Put Thousands of Women in ERs, Wrongly Coded as Miscarriages
Or give us certain posters
Posted on 5/29/25 at 12:04 pm to Night Vision
How exactly does an ER doctor detect a drug induced abortion a month later if the patient doesn’t tell them?
Posted on 5/29/25 at 12:07 pm to Auburn80
Medical testing?
Posted on 5/29/25 at 12:12 pm to PaperTiger
quote:
Medical testing?
No test for that. 30 days later the drug is out of your system. ER docs cannot figure everything out with no history and there is not a test for everything. The article clearly states it’s the fault of the patients not informing the doctor.
Posted on 5/29/25 at 12:38 pm to Auburn80
I was under the assumption that complications from medical abortions are within 24 hours of taking the medicines. The meds would still be in their systems if that's the case. And most people think the worst and seek medical advice quickly. I know there are other cases where complications last a week or more.
Had no idea that there was no testing for the 2 main rugs. You would think, in today's age, that almost any drug could be detected. Learned something new
Had no idea that there was no testing for the 2 main rugs. You would think, in today's age, that almost any drug could be detected. Learned something new
Posted on 5/30/25 at 2:15 am to Night Vision
Remove all federal funding for each of these criminal harbor establishments.
Posted on 5/30/25 at 2:26 am to Night Vision
Play stupid games, don't be surprised when you get a stupid prize.
Posted on 5/30/25 at 2:35 am to Night Vision
Sometimes it's more important to know who's behind the study then what the study actually concludes.
quote:
Charlotte Lozier Institute advises and leads the pro-life movement with groundbreaking scientific, statistical, and medical research.
Posted on 5/30/25 at 4:22 am to Auburn80
quote:
How exactly does an ER doctor detect a drug induced abortion a month later
I'm not sure as to the genesis of the question. The "study" retrospectively correlated ED miscarriages with recorded mifepristone/misoprostol procurement immediately preceding the event. Then examined how the medical coding was completed.
The fact the diagnostic coding might erroneously indicate "Delayed or excessive hemorrhage following incomplete spontaneous abortion" instead of "Delayed or excessive hemorrhage following (induced) termination of pregnancy" could be attributable to any number of things. The "study" attributes it to failure of communication in the doctor-patient interface. Certainly doctor-patient communication would play a role.
But the virtual 100% attribution is not a valid conclusion. Further, whereas the "study" implies nefarious institutional interference as culpable in any communication failures, often patients may simply not want to report drug-induced termination for a variety of privacy reasons. In terms of "misreporting," other issues would be expected to play a predominant role as well. For example, it's simply easier to code all miscarriages the same way, and it makes no billing difference at all.
The OP predominantly addresses drug induced abortions which are, for the most part, indistinguishable from natural miscarriages in presentation and treatment. The implication is that somehow there is a major difference in outcome or risk if drug induced abortions are misreported as natural miscarriages. There isn't.
It seems the underlying motivation here is to highlight the number of ED visits following mifepristone/misoprostol termination, and ensure they all get recorded in an antiabortion effort.
Posted on 5/30/25 at 4:29 am to TrueTiger
quote:
Sometimes it's more important to know who's behind the study then what the study actually concludes.
Don't worry, this will be buried and the abortion mills will keep humming. The flow of baby parts will continue.
Posted on 5/30/25 at 5:25 am to Night Vision
quote:
This guidance defies standard medical practice. In no other area of health care are patients told to lie or omit their critical medical history, especially in emergency scenarios where lives and outcomes rely on accurate information.
It's amazing, it's like all the abortion industry is interested in is continued death at any cost.
Posted on 5/30/25 at 6:39 am to Night Vision
quote:
Charlotte Lozier Institute advises and leads the pro-life movement with groundbreaking scientific, statistical, and medical research. We leverage this research to educate policymakers, the media, and the public on the value of life from fertilization to natural death.
No idea if what they found is legit or not but they certainly didn’t approach the study from impartiality.
Posted on 5/30/25 at 7:05 am to PaperTiger
quote:
Had no idea that there was no testing for the 2 main drugs.
So blood work could either confirm (or deny) the allegations by the (biased) institute?
I mean, I would suggest that people would want to know if the drugs that they were taking had a known “side effect.”
This seems like a rather simple solution - no?
Posted on 5/30/25 at 7:33 am to jimmy the leg
quote:Only if it was done within the first few days after mifepristone/misoprostol dosing.
So blood work could either confirm (or deny) the allegations by the (biased) institute?
Given dose to abortion to ED timing, testing would basically need to be done at the time of ED examination, or shortly thereafter.
My understanding is mifepristone/misoprostol was identified in the OP study using reviews of medical and billing/coverage records, not serum samples.
Posted on 5/30/25 at 7:37 am to TrueTiger
quote:
Sometimes it's more important to know who's behind the study then what the study actually concludes.
do you apply that same logic to you 'news sources' ???
Posted on 5/30/25 at 7:41 am to DavidTheGnome
quote:Who is impartial? Everyone has biases. That’s why studies like these are documented and can be reviewed to determine if they pass muster scientifically.
No idea if what they found is legit or not but they certainly didn’t approach the study from impartiality.
Posted on 5/30/25 at 7:43 am to Night Vision
quote:
Charlotte Lozier Institute
This is equivalent to Planned Parenthood putting out a study that says there no downsides to abortion.
This post was edited on 5/30/25 at 7:48 am
Posted on 5/30/25 at 7:46 am to Dizz
Muh sauces.
Posted on 5/30/25 at 7:48 am to Night Vision
Almost like it is intentional
Page 1 of 2
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News