Mifepristone is an anti-progestational drug that is the first component of the standard medical abortion regimen. For women who take mifepristone and then do not take misoprostol, which is the second component of the medical abortion regimen, it is possible that their pregnancy may continue to live birth. Since mifepristone is commonly used for medical abortion up to 9–10 weeks gestation, any adverse or teratogenic effects on the developing embryo/fetus must be considered, given exposure during the critical time of its development and organogenesis. Toxicology and teratology reports have cited studies demonstrating teratogenic effect of mifepristone in some animals. Current clinical guidelines for women exposed to mifepristone in the first trimester of pregnancy state that it is not known to be teratogenic based on limited published evidence from humans. The aim of this narrative systematic review was to investigate embryonic/fetal exposure to mifepristone and any association with congenital or fetal anomalies. This study was conducted by systematic searches of health databases from inception to February 2024. The references of relevant citations were manually searched to retrieve any additional citations not captured in database searching. Congenital anomalies and adverse outcomes were encountered at various doses of mifepristone exposure. A number of the congenital anomalies encountered in this review were explained by circumstances other than exposure to mifepristone. The present systematic review did not find data to support mifepristone being implicated as a teratogen.

Objective: To describe interventions, barriers and enablers associated with opioid tapering for patients with chronic non-cancer pain in rural primary care settings

Study design: Rapid realist review registered on the international register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO) and conducted in accordance with RAMESES standards.

Data sources: English language, peer-reviewed articles reporting qualitative, quantitative and mixed method studies, published between January 2016 and July 2020, and accessed via MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL Complete, PsycINFO, Informit or the CochraneLibrary during June and July 2020. Grey literature relating to prescribing, deprescribing or tapering of opioids in chronic non-cancer pain, published between January 2016 and July 2020, was identified by searching national and international government, health service and peek organisation websites using Google Scholar.

Data synthesis: Our analysis of reported approaches to tapering conducted across rural and non-rural contexts showed that tapering opioids is complex and challenging, and identified several barriers and enablers. Successful outcomes in rural areas appear likely through therapeutic relationships, coordination and support, by using modalities and models of care that are appropriate in rural settings and by paying attention to harm minimisation

Conclusion: Rural primary care providers do not have access to resources available in metropolitan centres for dealing with patients who have chronic non-cancer pain and are taking opioid medications. They often operate alone or in small group practices, without peer support and access to multidisciplinary and specialist teams. Opioid tapering approaches described in the literature include regulation, multimodal and multidisciplinary approaches, primary care providers support, guidelines, and patient-centred strategies. There is little research to inform tapering in rural contexts. Our review provides a synthesis of the current evidence in the form of a conceptual model. This preliminary model could inform the development of a model of care for use in implementation research, which could test a variety of mechanisms for supporting decision making, reducing primary care providers’ concerns about potential harms arising from opioid tapering, and improving patient outcomes.