| Literature DB >> 28298207 |
M Ndayizigiye1, M C Smith Fawzi2, C Thompson Lively2, N C Ware3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Family planning can reduce deaths, improve health, and facilitate economic development in resource-limited settings. Yet, modern contraceptive methods are often underused. This mixed-methods study, conducted in rural Burundi, sought to explain low uptake of contraceptives by identifying utilization barriers. Results may inform development of family planning interventions in Burundi and elsewhere.Entities:
Keywords: Africa; Contraceptives; Family Planning; Fertility; Rural Burundi
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28298207 PMCID: PMC5353936 DOI: 10.1186/s12913-017-2144-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Health Serv Res ISSN: 1472-6963 Impact factor: 2.655
Fig. 1Map of Burundi showing the study locations. This a copyrighted map by the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, Permission was granted for reprinting the map
Fig. 2Explanatory sequential design of study of low contraceptive uptake in rural Burundi
Availability of contraceptive materials
| Type of contraceptive | % ( |
|---|---|
| Long term methods | |
| Depot medroxyprogesterone acetate [DMPA] | 99.8 |
| Implant | 40.5 |
| Intra-uterine device [IUD] | 82.7 |
| Short term methods | |
| Oral contraceptives | 98.8 |
| Condom (male) | 97.4 |
| Condom (female) | 54.8 |
| Emergency contraception (Morning after pill) | 31.1 |
Stock-outs for available contraceptive methods across 39 health centers
| Type of contraceptive | % ( |
|---|---|
| Long term methods | |
| Depot medroxyprogesterone acetate [DMPA] ( | 0.9 |
| Implant ( | 10.9 |
| IUD ( | 1.1 |
| Short term methods | |
| Oral contraceptives ( | 1.7 |
| Condom (male) ( | 1.4 |
| Condom (female) ( | 2.6 |
| Emergency contraception (Morning after pill) ( | 0 |
*Sample size is less than 427 since some contraceptive methods were not available at all of the facilities
Average number of days per month of stock outs for the available contraceptives
| Type of contraceptive | Mean | SD | Min | Max | Median | 25% Interquartile Range | 75% Interquartile Range |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Long term methods | |||||||
| Depot medroxyprogesterone acetate [DMPA] ( | 0.03 | 0.4 | 0 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Implant ( | 0.9 | 4.3 | 0 | 29 | 0 | 0 | 20 |
| Intra-uterine device [IUD] ( | 0.2 | 2.3 | 0 | 30 | 0 | 0 | 6 |
| Short term methods | |||||||
| Oral contraceptives ( | 0.1 | 1.5 | 0 | 23 | 0 | 0 | 6 |
| Condom (male) ( | 0.1 | 1.6 | 0 | 30 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Condom (female) ( | 0.5 | 3.8 | 0 | 31 | 0 | 0 | 25 |
| Emergency contraception (Morning after pill) ( | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Fig. 3Relationship between availability of contraceptives and uptake ratio
Fig. 4Relationship between uptake and the number of health professionals engaged and trained in family planning
Multivariate linear regression of uptake ratio onto number of health professionals engaged in family planning services provision, number of health professionals fully trained in family planning service provision, types of contraceptives available and number of contraceptives stocked out (n = 427)
| Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis* | |
|---|---|---|
| Beta (95% CI) | Beta (95% CI) | |
|
|
| |
| Number of health professionals engaged | 0.0040341 (0.0028246, 0.0052435) | 0.002981 (0.0016179, 0.0043441) |
| <0.001 | <0.001 | |
| Number of health professionals trained | 0.0032803 (0.000626, 0.0059347) | −0.0028119 (−0.0058121, 0.0001884) |
| 0.016 | 0.066 | |
| Number of types of available contraceptives | 0.0045371 (0.0030997, 0.0059746) | 0.0037303 (0.0019481, 0.0055125) |
| <0.001 | <0.001 | |
| Contraceptives stocked out | −0.0044289 (−0.0110464, 0.0021886) | −0.0028839 (−0.0068344, 0.0010665) |
| 0.187 | 0.152 |
*For multivariate analysis, all four predictor variables were included in the model simultaneously
Fig. 5Conceptual framework for factors inhibiting uptake of contraceptive services