| Literature DB >> 36199076 |
Desale Bihonegn Asmamaw1, Wubshet Debebe Negash2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Unmet need for family planning refers to fertile women who want to limit or space their delivery but are not using contraceptive methods. Despite multiple studies were conducted to address family planning in Ethiopia, there is limited information on unmet need in high fertility regions. Knowing the magnitude and predictors of unmet need in the study area helps as an impute for interventions. Therefore, this study aims to assess the magnitude and predictors of unmet need for family planning among reproductive age women in high fertility regions of Ethiopia.Entities:
Keywords: Ethiopia; High fertility regions; Unmet need for family planning
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36199076 PMCID: PMC9535900 DOI: 10.1186/s12905-022-01982-w
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Womens Health ISSN: 1472-6874 Impact factor: 2.742
Fig. 1Unmet need for family planning among reproductive-age women in high fertility regions of Ethiopia (Westoff Model, 2012)
Socio-demographic and economic characteristics of study participants in high fertility region of Ethiopia
| Variables | Frequency (n) | Percentage (%) |
|---|---|---|
| Age | ||
| 15–24 | 1054 | 24.44 |
| 25–34 | 1926 | 44.67 |
| 35–49 | 1332 | 30.89 |
| Religion | ||
| Orthodox | 794 | 18.40 |
| Muslim | 2595 | 60.17 |
| Protestant | 774 | 17.94 |
| Other | 150 | 3.48 |
| Resident | ||
| Rural | 3838 | 89 |
| Urban | 474 | 11 |
| Region | ||
| Afar | 94 | 2.19 |
| Somali | 322 | 7.46 |
| Oromia | 3896 | 90.35 |
| Educational status | ||
| No formal education | 2806 | 65.06 |
| Primary education | 1201 | 27.86 |
| Secondary and above | 305 | 7.08 |
| Occupation of the respondent | ||
| No employed | 2526 | 58.58 |
| Employed | 1786 | 41.42 |
| Household wealth index | ||
| Poor | 1868 | 43.32 |
| Middle | 834 | 19.35 |
| Rich | 1610 | 37.34 |
| Media exposure | ||
| Yes | 1578 | 36.60 |
| No | 2734 | 63.40 |
| Educational status of husband | ||
| No formal education | 2022 | 46.89 |
| Primary education | 1693 | 39.25 |
| Secondary and above | 597 | 13.86 |
Obstetric history of the study participants in high fertility regions of Ethiopia
| Variables | Frequency (n) | Percentage (%) |
|---|---|---|
| Parity | ||
| Primipara | 875 | 20.30 |
| Multipara | 3436 | 79.70 |
| ANC follow up | ||
| Yes | 1631 | 51.05 |
| No | 1563 | 48.95 |
| Terminated pregnancy | ||
| Yes | 426 | 9.88 |
| No | 3886 | 90.12 |
| Desired number of children | ||
| Have another | 2345 | 54.37 |
| Undecided | 302 | 7.00 |
| Wants no more | 1666 | 38.62 |
| Decision maker on contraceptive | ||
| Mainly respondent | 189 | 16.66 |
| Mainly husband | 116 | 10.25 |
| Jointly | 828 | 73.12 |
| Number of living children | ||
| No child | 329 | 7.64 |
| 1–2 | 1991 | 27.63 |
| 3–4 | 1150 | 26.66 |
| 5+ | 1642 | 38.07 |
Fig. 2Unmet need for family planning in high fertility regions of Ethiopia
Model comparison and random effect analysis result in high fertility regions of Ethiopia
| Random effect | Null model | Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ICC | 0.49 | 0.37 | 0.31 | 0.28 |
| Variance | 2.53 | 1.70 | 1.58 | 1.43 |
| MOR | 4.52 | 3.46 | 3.24 | 3.13 |
| PCV (%) | Reference | 32.81 | 37.55 | 43.48 |
|
| ||||
| Deviance(-2 LL) | 2417.78 | 2357.90 | 2246.62 | 2204.34 |
Multi-level mixed-effect logistic regression analysis predictors of unmet need for FP among reproductive age women in high fertility regions of Ethiopia
| Variables | Model 1 AOR (95% CI) | Model 2 AOR (95%CI) | Model 3 AOR (95%CI) |
|---|---|---|---|
| |||
| Age | |||
| 15–24 | 1.31 (0.97, 1.76) | 1.09 (0.69, 1.74) | |
| 25–34 | 1.24 (0.95,1.61) | 0.79 (0.59, 1.06) | |
| 35+ | 1 | 1 | |
| Educational status of the respondents | |||
| No formal education | 1.23 (1.03, 1.71) | 1.65 (1.17, 2.15) | |
| Primary education | 1.21 (0.80, 1.83) | 1.35 (0.79, 2.85) | |
| Secondary and higher | 1 | 1 | |
| Wealth index | |||
| Poor | 1.54(1.25, 1.91) | 1.67 (1.34, 2.09) | |
| Middle | 1.13 (0.89, 1.42) | 1.11 (0.89, 1.41) | |
| Rich | 1 | 1 | |
| Media exposure | |||
| No | 1.30(1.08, 1.56) | 1.32 (1.09, 1.58) | |
| Yes | 1 | 1 | |
| Number of alive children | |||
| No child | 1.02 (0.71, 1.25) | 1.05 (0.43, 2.43) | |
| 1–2 | 0.78 (0.62 1.10) | 0.73 (0.59, 1.04) | |
| 3–4 | 0.81 (0.63, 1.12) | 0.79 (0.65, 1.09) | |
| 5+ | 1 | 1 | |
| Parity | |||
| Prime para | 1 | 1 | |
| Multipara | 1.55 (1.14, 2.13) | 1.57(1.15, 2.16) | |
| Sex of household head | |||
| Male | 1.22 (0.96,1.53) | 1.39 (1.11, 1.77) | |
| Female | 1 | 1 | |
|
| |||
| Community-level poverty | |||
| High | 0.97 (0.63,1.47) | 0.79 (0.53, 1.19) | |
| Low | 1 | 1 | |
| Community media exposure | |||
| High | 0.81 (0.56, 1.17) | 0.87 (0.62, 1.25) | |
| Low | 1 | 1 | |
| Residency | |||
| Rural | 2.19 (1.34, 3.59) | 2.45 (1.12, 3.59) | |
| Urban | 1 | 1 | |
| Region | |||
| Somali | 0.64 (0.0.31, 1.30) | 0.54 (0.27, 1.11) | |
| Oromia | `1.76 (0.91, 3.41) | 1.88 (0.97, 3.64) | |
| Afar | 1 | 1 | |
| Distance to the health facility | |||
| Big problem | 1.19 (0.97, 1.44) | 1.13 (0.92, 1.38) | |
| Not big problem | 1 | 1 |
* Statistically significant at p-value < 0.05, AOR Adjusted Odds Ratio, COR Crude Odds Ratio, Null
Model: adjusted for individual-level characteristics, Model 2: adjusted for community-level
Characteristics, Model 3: adjusted for both individual and community-level characteristics