| Literature DB >> 31557217 |
Ilene S Speizer1,2, David K Guilkey1,3, Veronica Escamilla1, Peter M Lance1, Lisa M Calhoun1, Osifo T Ojogun4, David Fasiku4.
Abstract
Few studies have examined the sustainability of family planning program outcomes in the post-program period. This article presents the results of a natural experiment where the Nigerian Urban Reproductive Health Initiative Phase I programming ended in early 2015 and Phase II activities continued in a subset of cities. Using data collected in 2015 and 2017, we compare contraceptive ideation and modern family planning use in two cities: Ilorin where program activities concluded in 2015 and Kaduna where program activities continued. The results demonstrate that exposure to program activities decreased in Ilorin but for those individuals reporting continuing exposure, the effect size of exposure on modern family planning use remained the same and was not significantly different from Kaduna. Modern family planning use continued to increase in both cites but at a lower rate than during Phase I. The results are useful for designing family planning programs that sustain beyond the life of the program.Entities:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31557217 PMCID: PMC6762171 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0222790
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Descriptive characteristics of longitudinal sample of women living in the Nigerian cities of Kaduna and Ilorin surveyed in both 2015 and 2017.
| Kaduna | Ilorin | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2015 | 2017 | P-value | 2015 | 2017 | P-value | |
| Age (years) | ||||||
| 15–19 | 20.28 | 16.46 | <0.001 | 16.37 | 14.39 | 0.042 |
| 20–24 | 19.63 | 16.50 | 17.45 | 11.97 | ||
| 25–29 | 19.46 | 18.92 | 16.64 | 16.63 | ||
| 30–34 | 17.63 | 16.56 | 18.74 | 16.99 | ||
| 35–39 | 12.41 | 14.49 | 17.29 | 20.96 | ||
| 40–44 | 6.53 | 10.12 | 8.95 | 11.06 | ||
| 45–49 | 4.05 | 6.94 | 4.56 | 8.01 | ||
| Mean age (median) | 27.53 (27) | 29.62 (29) | 29.03 (29) | 31.02 (31) | ||
| Marital status | ||||||
| In union | 65.66 | 64.74 | 0.306 | 72.74 | 71.25 | 0.330 |
| Divorced/widowed | 3.77 | 4.74 | 1.94 | 3.17 | ||
| Never married | 30.57 | 30.52 | 25.32 | 25.59 | ||
| Education | ||||||
| No education | 11.60 | 8.67 | <0.001 | 11.53 | 8.60 | 0.003 |
| Primary | 15.29 | 13.58 | 12.98 | 15.09 | ||
| Junior secondary | 15.29 | 11.46 | 5.91 | 3.17 | ||
| Senior secondary | 37.48 | 40.63 | 36.66 | 34.11 | ||
| Higher | 20.33 | 25.66 | 32.91 | 39.04 | ||
| Religion | ||||||
| Muslim | 66.72 | 64.73 | 0.344 | 69.09 | 67.82 | 0.278 |
| Primary language spoken at home | ||||||
| Hausa | 69.28 | 66.49 | 0.585 | 1.75 | 0.77 | 0.510 |
| Yoruba | 4.54 | 5.27 | 85.94 | 85.77 | ||
| English/Pigeon English | 11.01 | 11.14 | 3.29 | 4.13 | ||
| Other | 15.17 | 17.11 | 9.02 | 9.34 | ||
| Average asset score | 3.72 | 3.77 | 0.386 | 3.58 | 3.76 | .025 |
| Travel to another city in Nigeria in past year | 42.42 | 51.05 | 0.002 | 40.04 | 47.09 | 0.007 |
| Number of observations | 1,097 | 1,097 | -- | 438 | 438 | -- |
Note: Significance based on F-tests. All descriptive percentages are weighted using weights from appropriate time period (2015 or 2017). Number of observations unweighted.
*Sum of reported household materials and assets including cement walls, electricity, piped water in the home/yard, flush toilet to septic/sewer system, refrigerator, vehicle, and own home structure; significance based on Wald test.
Fig 1Conceptual framework for sustainability of family planning programming beyond the program cycle.
Modern contraceptive use, program exposure, and ideation characteristics for the longitudinal sample of women surveyed in 2015 and 2017, stratified by city.
| Kaduna | Ilorin | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2015 | 2017 | P-value | 2015 | 2017 | P-value | ||
| Total population | 1,097 | 1,097 | -- | 438 | 438 | -- | |
| Contraceptive use | |||||||
| % modern contraceptive use | 14.86 | 21.69 | <0.001 | 22.89 | 27.07 | 0.049 | |
| Method mix among modern method users (n) | 155 | 218 | 103 | 119 | |||
| % of users using long-acting methods | 28.63 | 28.95 | 0.953 | 18.50 | 18.82 | 0.929 | |
| % of users using short-acting methods | 71.37 | 71.05 | 81.50 | 81.18 | |||
| Ideation factors representing women’s knowledge, | |||||||
| Know about more than 6 methods out of 10 | 59.03 | 65.25 | 0.015 | 65.88 | 61.42 | 0.210 | |
| Reject more than 6 myths out of 10 | 49.95 | 54.97 | 0.222 | 54.88 | 66.11 | 0.018 | |
| Discuss family size with partner in last 6 | 20.51 | 80.45 | <0.001 | 34.36 | 63.99 | <0.001 | |
| Discuss FP with partner in last 6 months | 41.92 | 26.97 | <0.001 | 44.36 | 22.98 | <0.001 | |
| Discuss FP with significant other besides | 39.09 | 52.91 | <0.001 | 36.20 | 34.57 | 0.675 | |
| Perceive at least one non-spouse | 56.90 | 80.67 | <0.001 | 60.63 | 49.72 | 0.029 | |
| Perceive that all or most women in | 26.69 | 25.43 | 0.703 | 15.37 | 17.35 | 0.353 | |
| Self-efficacy score >4 out of 6 | 64.82 | 67.26 | 0.563 | 54.84 | 58.53 | 0.242 | |
| Does not need permission to use FP | 11.30 | 16.03 | 0.071 | 7.98 | 12.63 | 0.012 | |
| Recommend FP to someone | 20.02 | 30.53 | <0.001 | 11.93 | 20.14 | 0.005 | |
| Mean ideation index value | 0.13 | 0.46 | 0.001 | -0.09 | -0.19 | 0.355 | |
| Exposure to individual NURHI demand generating | |||||||
| Television programs | 42.64 | 76.77 | <0.001 | 81.94 | 59.21 | <0.001 | |
| Radio programs | 48.45 | 73.59 | <0.001 | 89.26 | 76.16 | 0.016 | |
| Community outreach | 23.56 | 38.25 | <0.001 | 15.85 | 11.28 | 0.085 | |
| Provider badge | 11.33 | 13.41 | 0.380 | 31.97 | 25.46 | 0.105 | |
| SMS | 5.45 | 9.37 | 0.036 | 21.56 | 6.15 | <0.001 | |
| Billboard | 6.58 | 4.63 | 0.311 | 24.83 | 2.70 | <0.001 | |
| Cards | 6.48 | 18.31 | <0.001 | 31.26 | 14.08 | <0.001 | |
| Logo | 49.21 | 76.08 | <0.001 | 79.29 | 77.36 | 0.592 | |
| Mean exposure index value | -0.34 | 0.27 | <0.001 | 1.25 | -0.03 | <0.001 | |
| Exposure to grouped NURHI demand generating activities | |||||||
| Mass media–Television and/or radio programs | 58.87 | 88.44 | <0.001 | 93.26 | 81.20 | 0.049 | |
| Print media–Billboard, provider badge, cards | 19.22 | 29.07 | 0.003 | 49.40 | 35.05 | 0.002 | |
| Community outreach and SMS | 26.95 | 43.00 | <0.001 | 30.92 | 16.77 | <0.001 | |
Note: All values are weighted using weights from the appropriate time period (2015 or 2017).
† Modern methods include: injectables, intrauterine device (IUD), implants, pills (emergency and daily), condoms, and sterilization.
¥Denominator is women using modern contraceptive methods, excluding LAM; long-acting methods include sterilization, implants, and IUDs; short-acting methods include daily and emergency pills, injectables, and condoms.
*Binary variable generated using median value as cutoff.
£Principle components analysis used to generate continuous ideation index that combines the ten binary ideation factors, using data from Kaduna and Ilorin in 2017. We then applied the 2017 loadings from the first principal component to the 2015 ideation factors to manually generate continuous ideation index values for Kaduna and Ilorin in 2015. The same approach was used to generate a continuous exposure index, using the eight individual exposures.
Correlated random effects results for the 2015 and 2017 longitudinal sample–three sets of results defined by the outcome and main predictors.
| Coefficient | SE | P-value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Kaduna | 0.8000 | 0.1004 | <0.001 |
| 2017 dummy | 0.1851 | 0.0442 | <0.001 |
| Exposure index | 0.2453 | 0.0204 | <0.001 |
| Travel to another city in Nigeria in past year | 0.0095 | 0.0602 | 0.874 |
| Kaduna | -0.5155 | 0.2882 | 0.074 |
| 2017 dummy | 0.3417 | 0.1318 | 0.010 |
| Ideation index | 0.6185 | 0.0735 | <0.001 |
| Travel to another city in Nigeria in past year | -0.3876 | 0.1742 | 0.026 |
| Kaduna | 0.1688 | 0.2811 | 0.548 |
| 2017 dummy | 0.4172 | 0.1265 | 0.001 |
| Exposure index | 0.2025 | 0.0563 | <0.001 |
| Travel to another city in Nigeria in past year | -0.3602 | 0.1667 | 0.031 |
Note: Models adjusted for age, marital status, religion, education, language, and household assets.
*Results for model (c) controls presented in Table 4; Similar control variable results obtained for models (a) and (b), not shown.
Controls for correlated random effects model [Table 3, model (c)] of modern contraceptive use and exposure index for the 2015 and 2017 longitudinal sample.
| Coefficient | SE | P-value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age | |||
| 15–19 years | Ref | ||
| 20–24 years | 1.7821 | 0.6742 | 0.008 |
| 25–29 years | 1.7250 | 0.7448 | 0.021 |
| 30–34 years | 2.3288 | 0.8054 | 0.004 |
| 35–39 years | 2.5186 | 0.8599 | 0.003 |
| 40–44 years | 2.3499 | 0.9225 | 0.011 |
| 45–49 years | 2.6055 | 1.0403 | 0.012 |
| Marital status | |||
| Never married | Ref | ||
| In union | 0.0957 | 0.5155 | 0.853 |
| Divorced/widowed | 0.1035 | 0.7582 | 0.891 |
| Education | |||
| None | Ref | ||
| Primary | -0.4363 | 0.4130 | 0.291 |
| Junior secondary | 0.4551 | 0.5143 | 0.376 |
| Senior secondary | 0.2979 | 0.4789 | 0.534 |
| Higher | 0.7286 | 0.5779 | 0.207 |
| Religion | |||
| Christian, Catholic, other | Ref | 0.037 | |
| Primary language spoken at home (%) | |||
| Hausa | Ref | ||
| Yoruba | -0.6868 | 0.6223 | 0.270 |
| English/Pigeon English | -0.0542 | 0.4193 | 0.897 |
| Other | -0.0327 | 0.4620 | 0.943 |
| Household asset score | -0.0263 | 0.0970 | 0.786 |
Marginal effects for the grouped NURHI exposure variables* on modern contraceptive use in 2015 and 2017 longitudinal sample.
| Margin | SE | P-value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| NURHI exposure | |||
| Mass media | 0.0443 | 0.0227 | 0.05 |
| Print media | 0.0443 | 0.0214 | 0.04 |
| Outreach | 0.0184 | 0.0204 | 0.37 |
| Joint exposure: | 0.0882 | 0.0293 | <0.01 |
| 2017 (vs. 2015) | 0.0356 | 0.0138 | 0.01 |
Note: Media represents exposure to NURHI TV and/or NURHI radio programs or advertisements; Outreach includes presentations promoting FP at life events including naming ceremonies, and/or receiving SMS promoting FP; Print media includes recall of viewing the NURHI logo on billboards, NURHI message cards, or provider badges.
*Model is similar to Model 3c above, however, instead of the exposure index the grouped exposure measures are included; models also are adjusted for age, marital status, religion, education, language, and household assets.