| Literature DB >> 31831034 |
Nabamallika Dehingia1,2, Anvita Dixit3,4, Sarah Averbach5, Vikas Choudhry6, Arnab Dey6, Dharmendra Chandurkar6, Priya Nanda7, Jay G Silverman3, Anita Raj3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We examine the association between the quality of family planning (FP) counseling received in past 24 months, and current modern contraceptive use, initiation, and continuation, among a sample of women in rural Uttar Pradesh, India.Entities:
Keywords: Contraceptive continuation; FP counseling; FP quality; India; Modern contraceptive use
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31831034 PMCID: PMC6909586 DOI: 10.1186/s12978-019-0844-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Reprod Health ISSN: 1742-4755 Impact factor: 3.223
Sample characteristics of married women of reproductive age in rural UP at the second round of survey (N = 1398)
| Characteristics | % (95% CI) / Median (IQR) |
|---|---|
| Modern contraceptive use behavior | |
| Continued use | 9.63 (7.40–12.44) |
| New use | 10.86 (8.45–13.83) |
| Discontinued use | 9.79 (7.34–12.95) |
| Consistent non-use | 69.72 (65.83–73.35) |
| FP counseling experience (during 2 years between the surveys) | |
| No counseling | 78.23 (74.15–81.83) |
| Lower quality counseling | 18.09 (14.80–21.93) |
| Higher quality counseling | 3.67 (2.58–5.20) |
| Age at first birth (continuous) | 20.00 (19.00–23.00) |
| Birth parity (continuous) | 3.00 (2.00–5.00) |
| Any living son | |
| No | 19.20 (16.23–22.58) |
| Yes | 80.80 (77.42–83.77) |
| Age at marriage (continuous) | 15.00(15.00–16.00) |
| Age of woman (continuous) | 33.00 (27.00–40.00) |
| Caste | |
| SC/ST | 23.36 (19.59–27.61) |
| OBC | 59.49 (54.70–64.12) |
| General | 17.15 (13.59–21.40) |
| Religion | |
| Hindu/Others | 80.35 (74.63–85.03) |
| Muslim | 19.65 (14.97–25.37) |
| Wealth index (continuous) | |
| Literacy | |
| Illiterate | 66.25 (62.60–69.70) |
| Literate | 33.75 (30.30–37.40) |
| Husband’s education | |
| Not completed primary education | 33.99 (29.81–38.44) |
| Completed primary education | 66.01 (61.56–70.19) |
Percentage of married women of reproductive age using different contraceptive methods in round 2, by different methods used in round 1 (N = 1398)
| Round 2 | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Female sterilization | Condoms | Pills | IUD | LAM | Other modern methodsa | Traditional methods | No use | ||
| Round 1 | Condoms (12.23%) | 0 | 53.22 (91) | 7.02 (12) | 1.17 (40) | 0 | 0 | 14.62 (25) | 23.98 (41) |
| Pills (4.22%) | 0 | 6.78 (4) | 42.37 (25) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 13.56 (8) | 37.29 (22) | |
| IUD (0.43%) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 83.33 (6) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 16.67 (1) | |
| LAM (3.00%) | 0.05 | 2.38 (1) | 14.28 (6) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 35.71 (15) | 42.86 (18) | |
| Other modern methods (0.65%) | 0 | 11.11 (1) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 22.22 (40) | 0 | 66.67 (6) | |
| Traditional methods (23.82%) | 0 | 10.51 (35) | 3.90 (13) | 1.20 (4) | 0.30 (1) | 0.30 (1) | 45.95 (153) | 37.84 (126) | |
| No use (Not pregnant) (50.43%) | 0.57 (4) | 6.24 (44) | 4.11 (29) | 0.99 (7) | 0.57 (4) | 0.55 (4) | 21.28 (150) | 65.67 (463) | |
| No use (Pregnant) (5.22%) | 0 | 5.48 (4) | 6.85 (5) | 1.37 (1) | 0 | 0 | 13.70 (10) | 72.60 (53) | |
aIncludes implants, injectables and female condoms
Bivariate and multivariate logistic regression to assess relationship between counseling and contraceptive use during round 2 of survey (N = 1398)
| Unadjusted OR (95% CI) | Adjusted OR (95% CI) | |
|---|---|---|
| FP counseling experience (during 2 years between the surveys) | ||
| No counselling | REF | REF |
| Lower quality counseling | 2.11 (1.40–3.18) *** | 2.42 (1.56–3.76) *** |
| Higher quality counseling | 4.07 (1.79–9.26) *** | 4.14 (1.72–9.99) *** |
| Age at first birth (continuous) | 0.99 (0.98–1.004) | 0.99 (0.98–1.00) |
| Birth parity (continuous) | 0.92 (0.84–1.006) * | 0.93 (0.82–1.03) |
| Any living son | ||
| No | REF | REF |
| Yes | 0.95 (0.57–1.55) | 1.19 (0.62–1.83) |
| Age at marriage (continuous) | 1.04 (0.94–1.16) | 1.02 (0.90–1.16) |
| Age of woman (continuous) | 0.99 (0.96–1.01) | 1.00 (0.97–1.02) |
| Caste | ||
| SC/ST | REF | REF |
| OBC | 0.99 (0.64–1.55) | 0.99 (0.65–1.49) |
| General | 1.56 (0.98–2.47) * | 1.21 (0.75–1.95) |
| Religion | ||
| Hindu/Others | REF | REF |
| Muslim | 0.62 (0.37–1.01) * | 0.64 (0.38–1.07) * |
| Wealth index (continuous) | 1.01 (1.003–1.02) ** | 1.01 (1.001–1.02) ** |
| Literacy | ||
| Illiterate | REF | REF |
| Literate | 1.46 (0.96–2.24) * | 1.11 (0.71–1.72) |
| Husband’s education | ||
| Not completed primary education | REF | REF |
| Completed primary education | 1.13 (0.75–1.69) | 0.72 (0.49–1.05) * |
*p < 0.10 ** p < 0.05 ***p < 0.01
Multinomial logistic regression models to assess association between counseling and contraceptive use behavior [Reference category for multinomial regression: Consistent non-use of modern contraceptives] (N:1398)
| Continued users AOR (95% CI) | New users AOR (95% CI) | Discontinued users AOR (95% CI) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| FP counseling experience (during 2 years between the surveys) | |||
| No counseling | REF | REF | REF |
| Lower quality counseling | 2.22 (1.08–4.52) ** | 2.94 (1.78–4.15) *** | 1.35 (0.68–2.71) |
| Higher quality counseling | 5.93 (1.97–17.83) *** | 4.22 (1.44–12.35) *** | 2.25 (0.61–8.20) |
| Age at first birth (continuous) | 1.00(0.97–1.02) | 1.00 (0.98–1.01) | 1.01 (0.98–1.03) |
| Birth parity (continuous) | 0.91 (0.78–1.06) | 0.95 (0.82–1.08) | 0.98 (0.84–1.14) |
| Any living son | |||
| No | REF | REF | REF |
| Yes | 2.05 (0.91–4.58) * | 0.81 (0.39–1.66) | 1.38 (0.60–3.18) |
| Age at marriage (continuous) | 1.05 (0.88–1.25) | 0.97 (0.84–1.12) | 0.93 (0.73–1.17) |
| Age of woman (continuous) | 0.99 (0.96–1.02) | 1.02 (0.98–1.05) | 1.103 (0.98–1.07) |
| Caste | |||
| SC/ST | REF | REF | REF |
| OBC | 1.08 (0.52–2.26) | 0.72 (0.44–1.18) | 0.47 (0.25–0.87) ** |
| General | 1.78 (0.77–4.08) | 1.03 (0.56–1.90) | 0.90 (0.40–1.98) |
| Religion | |||
| Hindu/Others | REF | REF | REF |
| Muslim | 0.85 (0.41–1.74) | 0.58 (0.29–1.19) | 0.77 (0.38–1.54) |
| Wealth index (continuous) | 1.01 (0.99–1.03) | 1.01 (0.99–1.02) | 1.00 (0.98–1.01) |
| Literacy | |||
| Illiterate | REF | REF | REF |
| Literate | 1.18 (0.66–2.08) | 1.15 (0.66–1.97) | 1.62 (0.94–2.78) |
| Husband’s education | |||
| Not completed primary education | REF | REF | REF |
| Completed primary education | 1.16 (0.62–2.15) | 0.64 (0.38–1.08) * | 1.34 (0.72–2.49) |
*p < 0.10 ** p < 0.05 ***p < 0.01
Multinomial logistic regression models to assess association between lower and higher counseling and contraceptive use behavior [Reference category for multinomial regression: Consistent non-use of modern contraceptives] (N:310)
| Continued users AOR (95% CI) | New users AOR (95% CI) | Discontinued users AOR (95% CI) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| FP counseling experience (during 2 years between the surveys) | |||
| Lower quality counseling | REF | REF | REF |
| Higher quality counseling | 2.65 (0.73–9.59) | 1.21 (0.35–4.09) | 1.39 (0.32–6.09) |
Note: Model adjusted for all covariates