| Literature DB >> 23978064 |
Jean Christophe Fotso1, Ilene S Speizer, Carol Mukiira, Paul Kizito, Vane Lumumba.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Kenya is characterized by high unmet need for family planning (FP) and high unplanned pregnancy, in a context of urban population explosion and increased urban poverty. It witnessed an improvement of its FP and reproductive health (RH) indicators in the recent past, after a period of stalled progress. The objectives of the paper are to: a) describe inequities in modern contraceptive use, types of methods used, and the main sources of contraceptives in urban Kenya; b) examine the extent to which differences in contraceptive use between the poor and the rich widened or shrank over time; and c) attempt to relate these findings to the FP programming context, with a focus on whether the services are increasingly reaching the urban poor.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23978064 PMCID: PMC3847584 DOI: 10.1186/1475-9276-12-71
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Equity Health ISSN: 1475-9276
Characteristicsof currently married women: Urban Kenya - 1993, 1998, 2003 and 2008/09
| Household wealth2 | | | | | |
| Poor | 28.6 | 28.3 | 31.3 | 31.6 | 30.1 |
| Middle | 31.8 | 33.9 | 34.5 | 34.8 | 34.0 |
| Rich | 39.6 | 37.9 | 34.2 | 33.6 | 35.9 |
| Women education | | | | | |
| No education | 10.2 | 5.3 | 8.1 | 5.1 | 6.9 |
| Primary | 43.2 | 44.4 | 44.1 | 38.3 | 42.3 |
| Secondary+ | 46.6 | 50.3 | 47.8 | 56.6 | 50.8 |
| Religion | | | | | |
| Catholic | 26.4 | 27.1 | 21.1 | 15.5 | 21.9 |
| Other Christian | 54.4 | 56.0 | 64.4 | 68.2 | 61.6 |
| Others | 19.2 | 16.8 | 14.5 | 16.4 | 16.5 |
| Region | | | | | |
| Nairobi | 38.9 | 40.4 | 38.3 | 31.5 | 36.9 |
| Central | 6.5 | 4.3 | 8.1 | 6.9 | 6.5 |
| Coast | 15.7 | 15.5 | 14.7 | 19.5 | 16.5 |
| Eastern | 6.5 | 7.2 | 4.7 | 6.8 | 6.3 |
| Nyanza | 5.6 | 13.9 | 7.9 | 8.0 | 9.1 |
| Rift Valley | 18.5 | 13.4 | 20.1 | 20.2 | 18.1 |
| Western | 8.5 | 5.2 | 4.2 | 5.6 | 5.6 |
| North Eastern | NA | NA | 2.1 | 1.5 | 1.0 |
| Woman’s age | | | | | |
| <24 | 31.5 | 31.5 | 29.8 | 24.9 | 29.1 |
| 25-34 | 46.8 | 42.8 | 41.7 | 45.7 | 44.0 |
| 35+ | 21.6 | 25.8 | 28.6 | 29.4 | 26.9 |
| Number of living children | | | | | |
| 0-1 | 34.1 | 32.7 | 35.7 | 35.2 | 34.5 |
| 2-3 | 38.7 | 42.8 | 40.8 | 46.0 | 42.5 |
| 4+ | 27.2 | 24.5 | 23.5 | 18.8 | 23.0 |
| Fertility intentions | | | | | |
| Want a child within 2 years | 15.4 | 17.6 | 21.4 | 17.4 | 18.2 |
| Wants a child after 2 years/unsure/undecided | 34.3 | 31.1 | 32.3 | 38.2 | 34.1 |
| Wants no more/sterilized/infecund | 50.3 | 51.3 | 46.3 | 44.4 | 47.7 |
| Modern contraceptive use | 37.9 | 41.0 | 39.9 | 46.6 | 41.8 |
| N | 607 | 838 | 1,440 | 1,421 | 4,306 |
1Weighted percentages.
2The wealth variable is constructed at the household level (for each urban sample). Women are thus not evenly distributed in the three wealth groups.
Figure 1Inequities in contraceptive prevalence rate: Urban Kenya - 1993, 1998, 2003 and 2008/09.
Logistic regression models (coefficients and p-value) on trends and inequities in modern contraceptive use: Urban Kenya - 1993, 1998, 2003 and 2008/09
| | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Survey year [Ref: 2003] | | | | | | | | | |
| 1993 | −0.155 | 0.217 | | −0.438 | 0.069 | † | −0.152 | 0.407 | |
| 1998 | −0.044 | 0.703 | | −0.101 | 0.624 | | 0.166 | 0.306 | |
| 2008/09 | 0.275 | 0.005 | ** | 0.487 | 0.003 | ** | 0.474 | 0.001 | ** |
| Household wealth [Ref: Poor] | | | | | | | | | |
| Middle | 0.414 | 0.000 | *** | 0.378 | 0.020 | * | | | |
| Rich | 0.446 | 0.000 | *** | 0.533 | 0.002 | ** | | | |
| Woman’s education [Ref: Primary] | | | | | | | | | |
| None | −0.774 | 0.000 | *** | | | | −0.637 | 0.030 | * |
| Secondary + | 0.529 | 0.000 | *** | | | | 0.720 | 0.000 | *** |
| Interaction Wealth-Survey time | | | | | | | | | |
| Middle-1993 | | | | 0.274 | 0.376 | | | | |
| Middle-1998 | | | | 0.162 | 0.541 | | | | |
| Middle-2008/09 | | | | −0.096 | 0.661 | | | | |
| Rich-1993 | | | | 0.449 | 0.142 | | | | |
| Rich-1998 | | | | 0.006 | 0.983 | | | | |
| | | | | | | | |||
| Interaction Education-Survey time | | | | | | | | | |
| None-1993 | | | | | | | 0.011 | 0.981 | |
| None-1998 | | | | | | | −0.175 | 0.697 | |
| None-2008/09 | | | | | | | −0.345 | 0.406 | |
| Secondary + −1993 | | | | | | | 0.002 | 0.994 | |
| Secondary + −1998 | | | | | | | −0.385 | 0.046 | * |
| | |||||||||
†p < .10; *p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001.
Model 1 controls for religion, region (province), and women’s age, number of living children and fertility preferences (coefficients not shown).
Model 2 adds the interaction of household wealth and survey time to Model 1 (Coefficients of interest are in bold).
Model 3 adds the interaction of woman’s education and survey time to Model 1 (Coefficients of interest are in bold).
Types and sources of modern contraceptive methods used, by wealth and education: Urban Kenya - 1993, 1998, 2003 and 2008/09
| | | | | | |
| Short term2 | 61.0 | 66.4 | 72.7 | 81.7 | 72.2 |
| Long acting3 | 25.2 | 19.2 | 17.0 | 11.9 | 17.2 |
| Permanent4 | 13.8 | 14.4 | 10.4 | 6.5 | 10.7 |
| Use of long acting and permanent methods by Household wealth5 | | | | | |
| Poor | 23.7 | 26.2 | 25.5 | 13.6 | 20.5 |
| Middle | 38.8 | 24.2 | 21.4 | 11.7 | 20.9 |
| Rich | 43.9 | 43.5 | 33.0 | 30.6 | 37.6 |
| p-value6 | 0.131 | 0.012 | 0.004 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Rich/poor ratio | 1.8 | 1.7 | 1.3 | 2.3 | 1.8 |
| Use of long acting and permanent methods by education | | | | | |
| None/Primary7 | 35.8 | 25.6 | 20.1 | 11.8 | 21.4 |
| Secondary+ | 41.0 | 38.8 | 31.8 | 22.1 | 31.8 |
| p-value | 0.566 | 0.035 | 0.003 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Secondary+/primary ratio | 1.1 | 1.5 | 1.6 | 1.9 | 1.5 |
| | | | | | |
| Public | 56.5 | 52.6 | 44.9 | 49.2 | 50.1 |
| Private/other | 43.5 | 47.4 | 55.1 | 50.8 | 49.9 |
| Use of private/other sources by Household wealth | | | | | |
| Poor | 30.0 | 45.6 | 34.3 | 31.7 | 34.1 |
| Middle | 23.2 | 34.8 | 47.1 | 51.5 | 42.3 |
| Rich | 60.9 | 57.7 | 73.4 | 67.1 | 64.9 |
| p-value | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Rich/poor ratio | 2.0 | 1.3 | 2.1 | 2.1 | 1.9 |
| Use of private/other sources by education | | | | | |
| None/Primary | 39.9 | 42.4 | 38.0 | 45.8 | 41.9 |
| Secondary+ | 45.7 | 50.7 | 65.9 | 53.7 | 54.9 |
| p-value | 0.435 | 0.330 | 0.000 | 0.034 | 0.000 |
| Secondary+/primary ratio | 1.1 | 1.2 | 1.7 | 1.2 | 1.3 |
| N (un-weighted) | 222 | 318 | 550 | 626 | 1,716 |
1Weighted percentages.
2Short-term methods: pills, injections, spermicides, condoms and lactational amenorrhea.
3Long-term methods: intra-uterine device (IUD) and implants.
4 Permanent methods: male and female sterilization.
5The wealth variable is constructed at the household level (for each urban sample). Women are thus not evenly distributed in the three wealth groups.
6p-value based on Chi-square tests.
7Less than 3% of women in the sample had no education.
8The source of method is categorised as Public (n = 800), Private (n = 821) and Other (n = 95), with Other including NGOs.