Contraceptive Choice and Switching Pattern among Married Women in Rural Community of South East Ethiopia

T. Bekele, Alem Gebremariam, Papelon Tura
{"title":"Contraceptive Choice and Switching Pattern among Married Women in Rural Community of South East Ethiopia","authors":"T. Bekele, Alem Gebremariam, Papelon Tura","doi":"10.4172/2327-4972.1000133","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Expanding access to long acting and permanent contraceptive methods has multiple benefits. They give women greater choice in selecting a contraceptive that meets their needs for delaying, spacing, or limiting pregnancy. They have the highest continuation rates of all family planning methods, and are more effective in actual use than short-acting methods for preventing unintended or closely spaced pregnancy. The study assessed the contraceptive knowledge, choice and switching pattern of married women in Agarfa District, Oromia, 2014. \nMethod: A community based cross-sectional study was conducted in Agarfa district. A total of 788 married women aged 15-49 years were involved in the survey. They were selected through systematic random sampling technique. The data were collected by using structured interviewer administered questionnaire, and analyzed by using SPSS version 21. \nResult: The most ever known (98.5%) and ever used (81.5%) type of modern contraceptive was Depo-provera. Permanent methods were rarely recognized as contraceptive method. Three forth (75.9%) of the participants were on modern contraceptive during the interview time. Twenty nine percent of those who want to limit their birth were not taking any modern contraceptive (MC). Nearly half (45%) of the participants stated fear of side effect was their main reason for non use of MC. Thirty percent (29.4%) of the participants had history of method shift from one MC to other MC method. The highest shift was observed from pill to depo-provera (49.1%), followed by depo-provera to implants (26.7%). \nConclusion: Women’s awareness and choice of contraceptives is limited to short acting methods. There is perceived fear of side effects of modern contraceptive. Women desiring no more children were not using any method. Therefore, strengthening the FP counseling to address fears of side effects and increase client awareness of expected and unexpected side-effects of all methods is essential.","PeriodicalId":356612,"journal":{"name":"Family Medicine and Medical Science Research","volume":"7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Family Medicine and Medical Science Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4172/2327-4972.1000133","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

Abstract

Background: Expanding access to long acting and permanent contraceptive methods has multiple benefits. They give women greater choice in selecting a contraceptive that meets their needs for delaying, spacing, or limiting pregnancy. They have the highest continuation rates of all family planning methods, and are more effective in actual use than short-acting methods for preventing unintended or closely spaced pregnancy. The study assessed the contraceptive knowledge, choice and switching pattern of married women in Agarfa District, Oromia, 2014. Method: A community based cross-sectional study was conducted in Agarfa district. A total of 788 married women aged 15-49 years were involved in the survey. They were selected through systematic random sampling technique. The data were collected by using structured interviewer administered questionnaire, and analyzed by using SPSS version 21. Result: The most ever known (98.5%) and ever used (81.5%) type of modern contraceptive was Depo-provera. Permanent methods were rarely recognized as contraceptive method. Three forth (75.9%) of the participants were on modern contraceptive during the interview time. Twenty nine percent of those who want to limit their birth were not taking any modern contraceptive (MC). Nearly half (45%) of the participants stated fear of side effect was their main reason for non use of MC. Thirty percent (29.4%) of the participants had history of method shift from one MC to other MC method. The highest shift was observed from pill to depo-provera (49.1%), followed by depo-provera to implants (26.7%). Conclusion: Women’s awareness and choice of contraceptives is limited to short acting methods. There is perceived fear of side effects of modern contraceptive. Women desiring no more children were not using any method. Therefore, strengthening the FP counseling to address fears of side effects and increase client awareness of expected and unexpected side-effects of all methods is essential.
埃塞俄比亚东南部农村社区已婚妇女避孕选择与转换模式
背景:扩大长效和永久性避孕方法的可及性具有多重益处。它们使妇女在选择避孕药具方面有更多的选择,以满足她们推迟、间隔或限制怀孕的需要。它们在所有计划生育方法中具有最高的延续率,并且在实际使用中比短效方法在预防意外怀孕或间隔较短的怀孕方面更有效。本研究评估了2014年奥罗米亚州Agarfa区已婚妇女的避孕知识、选择和转换模式。方法:采用以社区为基础的横断面调查方法。共有788名年龄在15-49岁之间的已婚女性参与了这项调查。他们是通过系统随机抽样技术选择的。采用结构化访谈问卷收集数据,采用SPSS 21进行分析。结果:已知最多(98.5%)、使用最多(81.5%)的现代避孕药具是provera。永久性避孕方法很少被认为是一种避孕方法。四分之三(75.9%)的参与者在访谈期间使用现代避孕措施。29%想要限制生育的人没有采取任何现代避孕措施。近一半(45%)的参与者表示害怕副作用是他们不使用MC的主要原因。30%(29.4%)的参与者有从一种MC方法转换到另一种MC方法的历史。从片剂到沉积- provvera的转移率最高(49.1%),其次是沉积- provvera到植入物(26.7%)。结论:妇女对避孕方法的认识和选择仅限于短效避孕方法。人们对现代避孕药具的副作用感到恐惧。不想再要孩子的妇女没有使用任何方法。因此,加强计划生育咨询,以解决对副作用的恐惧,并提高客户对所有方法的预期和意外副作用的认识是必不可少的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信