| Literature DB >> 35284908 |
Tallulah Grant-Maidment1, Katharina Kranzer1,2, Rashida A Ferrand1,2.
Abstract
There is substantial unmet need for family planning (FP) among women living with HIV (WLHIV), leading to unintended pregnancies and may contribute indirectly to increasing the risk of transmission of HIV. This review aims to determine whether integration of FP into HIV testing and care results in increased use of contraception, a reduction in unmet need for FP, improved use of safer conception methods and a reduction in unintended pregnancies in low and middle-income countries. A systematic review was undertaken incorporating studies from PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science and Global Health, the International AIDS Society Abstract Archive, the World STI & HIV Congress Abstract Archive and the Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections Abstract Archive published between 2016 and 2021, updating previous systematic reviews. After screening, 13 studies were included, 11 conducted in sub-Saharan Africa and 2 in India. The primary outcome of the review was contraceptive uptake and secondary outcomes included unmet need for FP, safer conception and unintended pregnancy. Integrated FP-HIV facilities were found to increase dual contraceptive use by at least 8% in five studies and modern contraceptive use by at least 8% in four studies. Findings from two studies suggested integration decreased the unmet need for contraception. Limited data prevented a conclusion from being drawn regarding whether integration increases safer conception. There was no evidence of integration reducing unintended pregnancies. The median quality score of studies was 3/9. Overall, integrated facilities have the potential of improving reproductive health of women accessing HIV services in LMICs. FP may be enhanced by including a safer conception component for WLHIV. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021251008, identifier: CRD42021251008.Entities:
Keywords: HIV; contraception; family planning; integration; safer conception; systematic review
Year: 2022 PMID: 35284908 PMCID: PMC8907733 DOI: 10.3389/fgwh.2022.837358
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Glob Womens Health ISSN: 2673-5059
Figure 1PRISMA flow chart depicting the process leading to the inclusion of studies for the review.
Study characteristics of all included studies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hawkins et al. ( | Design: Before/after design | 11 | FP counseling & on-site referral to contraception provider | Service: 1 HIV clinic | Outcome: Contraception use |
| Joshi et al. ( | Design: Quasi experimental | 30 | Repeated FP counseling, posters on dual methods, referral to FP clinics. | Outcome: Contraception use, unintended pregnancy, | |
| Joshi et al. ( | Design: Before/after design | 26 | Contraceptive needs assessment, dual contraception counseling, referral to FP centers | Service: 2 district hospital ART centers | Outcome: Contraception use |
| Cohen et al. ( | Design: Cohort analysis | 34 | FP counseling & provision. | Service: 18 HIV clinics | Outcome: Contraception use |
| Dulli et al. ( | Design: Quasi-experimental | 12 | Routine screening, expanded onsite availability of FP methods, dual protection education. | Service: 2 Drop in centers providing HIV counseling & testing | Outcome: Contraceptive use |
| Chen et al. ( | Design: Cross-sectional | 4 | FP consultation or provision of methods or both | Service: 106 HIV care & treatment centers | Outcome: Contraceptive use, unintended pregnancy, unmet need for FP |
| Tweya et al. ( | Design: Retrospective cohort analysis | 47 | Provision of FP methods | Service: ART clinic | Outcome: Contraception use |
| Guillaine et al. ( | Design: Retrospective cohort | 12 | Combined clinic offering FP, psychosocial support & breastfeeding counseling | Service: PMTCT clinics | Outcome: Contraception use |
| Mantell et al. ( | Design: Randomized intervention trial | NR | Contraceptive method provision, safer conception methods & types of contraception counseling, referrals for pregnancy termination. | Service: 4 HIV clinics | Outcome: Contraception use, safer conception |
| Casalini et al. ( | Design: Before/after design | 5 | FP counseling & services | Service: Mobile community based HIV testing and counseling ‘'plus” | Outcome: Contraception use |
| Nabirye et al. ( | Design: Cross-sectional | 4 | FP counseling | Service: 245 HIV clinics, PMTCT care | Outcome: Contraception use |
| Wagner et al. ( | Design: Three-arm cluster randomized intervention trial | 12 | Safer conception counseling or support for modern contraceptive use. | Service: 6 HIV clinics | Outcome: Contraception use, safer conception |
| Medley et al. ( | Design: Before/after design | 15 | Full range of FP methods, safer conception counseling, facilitated referral for refills | Service: 6 HIV clinics | Outcome: Contraception use, unmet need for FP, safer conception |
FP, Family planning; HIV, human immunodeficiency virus; WLHIV, women living with HIV; LARC, long acting reversible contraception; PPTCT, prevention of parents-to-child transmission; PMTCT, prevention of mother-to-child transmission; DIC, drop in centre; FSW, female sex workers; PLHIV, people living with HIV; ART, antiretroviral therapy.
Associations between integrated FP-HIV services and contraception use.
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Hawkins et al. ( | Before/after design | Survey to participants and providers before and after intervention. | Desire to use LARC: 29% (31/107) (95% CI: 20.40–37.60) of women expressed desire to use LARC post-intervention compared to 6% (8/141) (95% CI: 2.08–9.92) pre-intervention ( |
| Joshi et al. ( | Quasi experimental | A semi-structured questionnaire was delivered to all enrolled women at baseline and each follow-up. | Dual method contraception uptake: 32.6% (46/141) (95% CI: 24.9–40.3) of individuals were using dual methods in the intervention group by the end of the study compared to 10.6% (15/142) (95% CI: 5.5–15.7) in the control group ( |
| Joshi et al. ( | Before/after design | Pre-tested semi-structured interview at enrolment and follow-up. | Dual method contraception uptake: 44.6% (248/556) (95% CI: 40.46–48.74) of individuals were using dual methods post-intervention compared to 0% (0/556) pre-intervention. |
| Cohen et al. ( | Cohort analysis | Patient encounter forms were initially used to gather data. | More effective contraception use: 44.2% were using more effective contraceptive methods post-intervention compared to 31.7% at baseline |
| Dulli et al. ( | Quasi-experimental | Interviews were conducted on participants. | Modern contraception use: The odds of individuals in the intervention group using modern contraception were 1.38 times higher than in the control group (OR: 1.38 95% CI: 1.04–1.83) |
| Chen et al. ( | Cross-sectional | A FP survey was delivered to all women attending 106 HIV centers over a 5-day period and then integrated facility statistics were compared to non-integrated facility statistics. | Modern contraception prevalence rate: 88% of respondents attending integrated facilities used modern contraception compared to 80% at non-integrated facilities ( |
| Tweya et al. ( | Retrospective cohort analysis | Routine data was collected through an EMR system after clinic consultations | More effective contraceptive use: 27% (2,015/7,463) (95% CI: 26.00–28.00) of individuals were using more effective contraceptive methods at the endpoint compared to 26% (413/1,590) (95% CI: 23.84–28.16) at baseline |
| Guillaine et al. ( | Retrospective cohort | Information on mother-infant pairs were compared from when they first attended the integrated clinic to when they had been at the clinic for 12 months. Data was collected as part of routine clinical care. | Modern contraception use: 72% (131/182) (95% CI: 65.47–78.53) of participants were using modern contraception methods post-intervention compared to 30.3% (57/185) (95% CI: 23.68–36.92) at enrolment |
| Mantell et al. ( | Randomized intervention trial | Face-to-face interviews at baseline, follow up 1 and follow up 2. | Dual method use: The intervention group saw a 22% increase in use of dual method from baseline to follow-up 2. The control group observed a 12% increase from baseline to follow-up 2. |
| Casalini et al. ( | Before/after design | Patient data was obtained during community testing and counseling services and entered into a central database | Any contraceptive method use: 35% (949/2,691) (95% CI: 33.20–36.80) of participants were using a contraceptive method post-intervention compared to 22% (592/2,691) (95% CI: 20.43–23.57) at baseline. |
| Nabirye et al. ( | Cross-sectional | Data collated from a national cross-sectional survey | Modern contraception use: The prevalence of modern contraception use in integrated facilities was 1.21 times higher than in non-integrated services (adjusted PR: 1.21 95% CI: 1.10–1.33 |
| Wagner et al. ( | Three-arm cluster randomized intervention trial | Participants were interviewed using computer assisted software at each time point | Modern contraception use among those not trying to conceive: 14.6% (7/48) (95% CI: 4.60–24.60) of participants were using modern contraceptives in the intervention group compared to 19.4% (12/61) (95% CI: 9.48–29.32) in the control group p=0.487. Adjusted OR: 3.72 (95% CI: 0.37–37.49) |
| Medley et al. ( | Before/after design | Different participants were interviewed pre- and post-intervention and data extracted from their medical records | Effective contraception use: 49% (195/402) (95% CI: 44.12–53.88) of participants used effective contraception post-intervention compared to 38% (133/379) (95% CI: 33.12–42.88) pre-intervention p=0.003 |
FP, family planning; HIV, human immunodeficiency virus; LARC, long-acting reversible contraception; PR, prevalence ratio; OR, odds ratio.
Associations between integrated FP-HIV services and unmet need for FP.
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Chen et al. ( | Cross-sectional | A FP survey was delivered to all women attending 106 HIV centers over a 5-day period and then integrated facility statistics were compared to non-integrated facility statistics. | Unmet need for modern FP methods: 15% of women attending non-integrated facilities had an unmet need for modern FP compared to 8% in integrated facilities ( |
| Medley et al. ( | Before/after design | Different participants were interviewed pre- and post-intervention and data extracted from their medical records | Unmet need for FP: 46% (184/402) (95% CI: 41.12–50.88) of women in the post-intervention group had an unmet need for FP compared to 59% (210/379) (95% CI: 54.04–63.96) in the pre-intervention group ( |
FP, family planning; HIV, human immunodeficiency virus.
Associations between integrated FP-HIV services and safer conception.
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Mantell et al. ( | Randomized intervention trial | Face-to-face interviews at baseline, follow up 1 and follow up 2. | Following safer conception guidelines: 83% followed safer conception guidelines in the intervention group compared to 72% in the control group ( |
| Wagner et al. ( | Three-arm cluster randomized intervention trial | Participants were interviewed using computer assisted software at each time point. | Used timed condom-less sex or manual self-insemination accurately: 24.1% (46/191) (95% CI: 18.04–30.16) used methods accurately in the intervention group compared to 0% (0/85) in the control group (OR: 91.84 95% CI: 4.94–1709) |
| Medley et al. ( | Before/after design | Different participants were interviewed pre- and post-intervention and data extracted from their medical records | Discussed safer pregnancy with a healthcare provider: 39% (97/249) (95% CI: 32.94–45.06) in the post-intervention group discussed safer pregnancy compared to 27% (56/210) (95% CI: 21.00–33.00) in the pre-intervention group ( |
Associations between integrated FP-HIV services and unintended pregnancy.
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Joshi et al. ( | Quasi experimental | A semi-structured questionnaire was delivered to all enrolled women at baseline and each follow-up. | Number of unintended pregnancies: There were 13 unintended pregnancies recorded in the intervention group (n=150) (95% CI: 4.41–13.59) compared to 20 in the control group (n=150) (95% CI: 7.61-18.39) p>0.05 |
| Chen et al. ( | Cross-sectional | A FP survey was delivered to all women attending 106 HIV centers over a 5-day period and then integrated facility statistics were compared to non-integrated facility statistics. | Last pregnancy was unintended: 36% of women at integrated facilities reported their previous pregnancy was unintended compared to 35% at non-integrated facilities (p=0.81) |
FP, family planning; HIV, human immunodeficiency virus.
Quality analysis of included studies employing the 9-point quality scale.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Casalini et al. ( | 1 | |||||||||
| Chen et al. ( | 1 | |||||||||
| Cohen et al. ( | 3 | |||||||||
| Dulli et al. ( | 5 | |||||||||
| Guillaine et al. ( | 3 | |||||||||
| Hawkins et al. ( | 1 | |||||||||
| Joshi et al. ( | 3 | |||||||||
| Joshi et al. ( | 6 | |||||||||
| Mantell et al. ( | 7 | |||||||||
| Medley et al. ( | 4 | |||||||||
| Nabirye et al. ( | 2 | |||||||||
| Tweya et al. ( | 2 | |||||||||
| Wagner et al. ( | 7 | |||||||||
| Key | ||||||||||
| Yes | ||||||||||
| No | ||||||||||
| Not applicable | ||||||||||
| Not reported | ||||||||||