| Literature DB >> 35396286 |
Shari Krishnaratne1, Jenna Hoyt2, Jessie K Hamon2, Angela Barbra Ariko3, Carol Atayo3, Job Morukileng4, Nathaly Spilotros5, Jayne Webster2.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This study sought to understand, during an intervention which integrated family planning (FP) and immunisation, (1) if and how prevailing contextual factors influenced acceptability and use of modern contraceptive methods (MCMs) in a pastoral community in Uganda, (2) what mechanisms were triggered by these contextual factors (3) if these contextual factors changed between two time points 2 years apart and (4) the impact of contextual changes on mechanisms triggered and acceptability and use outcomes.Entities:
Keywords: Organisation of health services; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; Reproductive medicine
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35396286 PMCID: PMC8995957 DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-054277
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMJ Open ISSN: 2044-6055 Impact factor: 2.692
Figure 1Outline of data sources and study components and process. CMOs, context-mechanism-outcome.
Figure 2Initial programme theory. FP, family planning; HCWs, healthcare workers; VHTs, Village Health Team.
Constructs of the diffusion of innovations framework and the theoretical framework of acceptability
| Construct | Definition |
| Diffusion of innovations framework | |
| Relative advantage | The degree to which an innovation is perceived as being better than the idea it supersedes. |
| Compatability | The degree to which an innovation is perceived as consistent with the existing values, past experiences and needs of potential adopters. |
| Trialability | The degree to which an innovation may be experimented with on a limited basis. |
| Observability | The degree to which the results of an innovation are visible to others. |
| Complexity | The degree to which an innovation is perceived as relatively difficult to understand and use. |
|
| |
| Affective attitude | How an individual feels about the intervention. |
| Burden | The perceived amount of effort that is required to participate in the intervention. |
| Ethicality | The extent to which the intervention has good fit with an individual’s value system. |
| Intervention coherence | The extent to which the participant understands how the intervention works. |
| Opportunity costs | The extent to which benefits, profits or values must be given up to engage in the intervention. |
| Perceived effectiveness | The extent to which the intervention is perceived as likely to achieve its purpose. |
| Self-efficacy | The participant’s confidence that they can perform the behaviour(s) required to participate in the intervention. |
Stakeholder in-depth interview (IDI) summary
| Type of participant | Number of round 1 IDIs | Number of round 2 IDIs |
| Woman (FP users and non-users) | 5 | 15 |
| Health worker | 10 | 14 |
| VHT | 4 | 4 |
| Implementer | 2 | 2 |
| Male community member | – | 4 |
| Member of the District Health Team | 3 | 2 |
| Community volunteer | 3 | 1 |
| Total | 27 | 42 |
FP, family planning; VHT, Village Health Team.
Context-(intervention)-actor-mechanism-outcome configurations across two time points
| Theme: fear of side effects of MCMs | |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
CAMO, context-actor-mechanism-outcome; CIAMO, context-intervention-actor-mechanism-outcome; FP, family planning; MCMs, modern contraceptive methods; N/A, not applicable; WFP, World Food Programme.
Figure 3Revised programme theory. Contextual factors influenced intervention outcomes in round 1. Intervention components or contextual changes (in grey) led to the triggering of diffusion of innovation constructs that acted as catalysts for mechanisms of acceptability. FP, family planning; HCWs, healthcare workers; MCMs, modern contraceptive methods; WFP, World Food Programme.
Context-acceptability theories
| Theory 1 | In contexts where there are rumours or experience of MCM side effects women need to feel (understand and believe) that they can manage potential side effects. Ensuring that there are trained HCWs and community health workers that women can talk to about potential side effects will lead to women’s acceptability of MCMs. |
| Theory 2 | In contexts where there is a preference for natural FP methods but traditional practices of men being away from home are changing, men are more present within the household. Men’s understanding and belief that traditional methods for birth spacing no longer work will lead to their acceptability of MCMs. |
| Theory 3 | In contexts where traditional practices of men being away from home are changing, men are more present within the household. Men being able to see the negative impacts of having several children will lead to their willingness to engage in dialogue about MCMs with their partners, and will lead to their acceptability of MCMs. |
| Theory 4 | In a context of food insecurity, women’s perceived need to limit their family size in order to provide food for all their children will lead to increased acceptability of MCMs. |
FP, family planning; HCWs, healthcare workers; MCMs, modern contraceptive methods.