| Literature DB >> 28286546 |
Sara E Casey1, Martin Tshipamba2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Humanitarian assistance standards mandate specific attention to address the sexual and reproductive health (SRH) needs of conflict-affected populations. Despite these internationally recognised standards, access to SRH services is still often compromised in conflict settings. CARE in collaboration with the RAISE Initiative strengthened the Ministry of Health (MOH) to provide contraceptive services in Maniema province, Democratic Republic of the Congo. This study evaluated the effectiveness of this support for MOH health facility provision of contraception.Entities:
Keywords: Contraception; Democratic Republic of the Congo; Humanitarian aid; Reproductive health; War
Year: 2017 PMID: 28286546 PMCID: PMC5341463 DOI: 10.1186/s13031-017-0104-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Confl Health ISSN: 1752-1505 Impact factor: 2.723
Socio-demographic characteristics of the populations sampled in 2008 and 2010
| 2008 ( | 2010 ( |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) |
| ||
| 15–24 | 42.9% (264) | 38.1% (215) | |
| 25–34 | 31.4% (187) | 33.6% (193) | |
| 35–49 | 25.7% (155) | 28.3% (156) | |
| Mean age (SD), years | 28.0 (9.2) | 28.8 (9.6) |
|
| Marital status |
| ||
| Married & living with husband | 82.8% (517) | 82.5% (486) | |
| Married & not living with husband | 5.7% (38) | 7.8% (34) | |
| Not married, living with partner | 0.7% (3) | 0.3% (2) | |
| Not married, not living with partner | 10.8% (49) | 9.3% (42) | |
| Number of living children |
| ||
| 0 | 18.3% (96) | 16.6% (77) | |
| 1–2 | 29.5% (199) | 27.6% (168) | |
| 3–4 | 27.7% (158) | 29.0% (164) | |
| 5+ | 24.5% (153) | 28.3% (155) | |
| Religion |
| ||
| Muslim | 66.4% (394) | 73.1% (404) | |
| Catholic | 18.8% (115) | 18.8% (107) | |
| Protestant | 8.0% (55) | 3.7% (23) | |
| Pentecostal/Evangelical | 4.5% (29) | 3.1% (24) | |
| Other | 2.4% (14) | 1.4% (6) | |
| Formal education |
| ||
| None | 35.6% (204) | 34.1% (205) | |
| Did not complete primary school | 35.6% (224) | 32.4% (187) | |
| Completed primary school | 10.9% (60) | 10.5% (59) | |
| At least some secondary education | 17.9% (119) | 23.0% (113) | |
| Self-reported ability to read |
| ||
| With difficulty or not at all | 76.3% (453) | 74.3% (434) | |
| Easily | 23.7% (154) | 25.7% (130) | |
| Number of lifetime pregnancies |
| ||
| 0 | 12.1% (57) | 11.3% (54) | |
| 1–2 | 21.5% (145) | 22.3% (130) | |
| 3–4 | 21.0% (129) | 22.1% (128) | |
| 5–9 | 34.7% (217) | 31.9% (188) | |
| 10+ | 10.7% (59) | 12.3% (64) | |
| Reported an unwanted pregnancy |
| ||
| No | 73.9% (443) | 75.6% (441) | |
| Yes | 26.1% (163) | 24.4% (123) | |
Data are % of column weighted base (absolute counts), unless indicated. Bases are smaller for some variables due to missing data. Missing data are less than 0.5% for all variables
aN = weighted and unweighted base
Reported knowledge and use of modern contraceptive methods in 2008 and 2010
| 2008 (95% CI) ( | 2010 (95% CI) ( |
| Unadjusted OR (95% CI) ( | Adjusted OR (95% CI)b ( |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Spontaneous knowledge of modern contraceptive methods | ||||||
| Any modern method | 28.0% (25.1–30.7) | 49.4% (46.3–52.6) |
| 2.5 (2.1–3.0) | 2.7 (2.2–3.2) |
|
| Any LAPMc | 6.0% (4.4–7.6) | 10.3% (8.5–12.2) |
| 1.8 (1.3–2.5) | 1.87 (1.3–2.6) |
|
| Reported prior instruction on how to use modern contraceptive method | ||||||
| Any modern method | 28.8% (26.2–31.7) | 44.5% (41.4–47.5) |
| 1.98 (1.6–2.4) | 1.98 (1.6–2.4) |
|
| Any LAPMc | 7.9% (6.2–9.5) | 16.7% (14.5–19.1) |
| 2.3 (1.8–3.1) | 2.2 (1.7–3.0) |
|
| Reported ever use of modern contraceptive method | ||||||
| Any modern method | 11.5% (9.6–13.5) | 18.8% (16.4–21.3) |
| 1.8 (1.3–2.8) | 1.8 (1.4–2.4) |
|
| Any LAPMc | 0.3% (0.0–0.7) | 2.0% (1.1–2.8) |
| |||
| Reported current use of modern contraceptive method | ||||||
| Any modern method | 3.1% (2.0–4.2) | 5.9% (4.5–7.4) |
| 1.96 (1.3–3.0) | 2.03 (1.3–3.2) |
|
| Any LAPMc | 0% | 1.7% (1.0–2.6) |
| |||
aN = unweighted base
bAdjusted for religion and education
cLong-acting and permanent methods (LAPM) are IUD, implant, tubal ligation and vasectomy
Number of facilities providing contraceptive services in 2007 and 2010
| 2007 ( | 2010 ( | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Provided in previous 3 months (self-reported) | Method currently in stock | At least one staff trained to provide | Provided in previous 3 months (self-reported) | Method currently in stock | At least one staff trained to provide | |
| Pills | 21 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 21 | 22 |
| Injectables | 21 | 20 | 21 | 20 | 20 | 22 |
| IUDs | 2 | 2 | 2 | 7 | 9 | 19 |
| Implants | 0 | 0 | 0 | 21 | 21 | 22 |
Fig. 1Number of clients who started contraceptive methods and percentage who started LAPM in health facilities supported by CARE in Kasongo, DRC (n = 22, 2008-May 2011 and n = 9, June 2011–2014)
Fig. 2Contraceptive method mix from 2008–2010 (n = 22 facilities) and 2012–2014 (n = 9 facilities), Kasongo, DRC