Antenatal Care Interventions to Increase Contraceptive Use Following Birth in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Systematic Review and Narrative Synthesis.

IF 2.5 3区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Ona L McCarthy, Nasser Fardousi, Vandana Tripathi, Renae Stafford, Karen Levin, Farhad Khan, Maxine Pepper, Oona M R Campbell
{"title":"Antenatal Care Interventions to Increase Contraceptive Use Following Birth in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Systematic Review and Narrative Synthesis.","authors":"Ona L McCarthy, Nasser Fardousi, Vandana Tripathi, Renae Stafford, Karen Levin, Farhad Khan, Maxine Pepper, Oona M R Campbell","doi":"10.9745/GHSP-D-24-00059","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Health risks associated with short interpregnancy intervals, coupled with women's desires to avoid pregnancy following childbirth, underscore the need for effective postpartum family planning programs. The antenatal period provides an opportunity to intervene; however, evidence is limited on the effectiveness of interventions aimed at reaching women in the antenatal period to increase voluntary postpartum family planning in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). This systematic review aimed to identify and describe interventions in LMICs that attempted to increase postpartum contraceptive use via contacts with pregnant women in the antenatal period.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Studies published from January 2012 to July 2022 were considered if they were conducted in LMICs, evaluated an intervention delivered during the antenatal period, were designed to affect postpartum contraceptive use, were experimental or quasi-experimental, and were published in French or English. The main outcome of interest was postpartum contraceptive use within 1 year after birth, defined as the use of any method of contraception at the time of data collection. We searched EMBASE, Global Health, and Medline and manually searched the reference lists from studies included in the full-text screening.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We double-screened 771 records and included 34 reports on 31 unique interventions in the review. Twenty-three studies were published from 2018 on, with 21 studies conducted in sub-Saharan Africa. Approximately half of the study designs (n=16) were randomized controlled trials, and half (n=15) were quasi-experimental. Interventions were heterogeneous. Among the 24 studies that reported on the main outcome of interest, 18 reported a positive intervention effect, with intervention recipients having greater contraceptive use in the first year postpartum.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>While the studies in this systematic review were heterogeneous, the findings suggest that interventions that included a multifaceted package of initiatives appeared to be most likely to have a positive effect.</p>","PeriodicalId":12692,"journal":{"name":"Global Health: Science and Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Health: Science and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.9745/GHSP-D-24-00059","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Health risks associated with short interpregnancy intervals, coupled with women's desires to avoid pregnancy following childbirth, underscore the need for effective postpartum family planning programs. The antenatal period provides an opportunity to intervene; however, evidence is limited on the effectiveness of interventions aimed at reaching women in the antenatal period to increase voluntary postpartum family planning in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). This systematic review aimed to identify and describe interventions in LMICs that attempted to increase postpartum contraceptive use via contacts with pregnant women in the antenatal period.

Methods: Studies published from January 2012 to July 2022 were considered if they were conducted in LMICs, evaluated an intervention delivered during the antenatal period, were designed to affect postpartum contraceptive use, were experimental or quasi-experimental, and were published in French or English. The main outcome of interest was postpartum contraceptive use within 1 year after birth, defined as the use of any method of contraception at the time of data collection. We searched EMBASE, Global Health, and Medline and manually searched the reference lists from studies included in the full-text screening.

Results: We double-screened 771 records and included 34 reports on 31 unique interventions in the review. Twenty-three studies were published from 2018 on, with 21 studies conducted in sub-Saharan Africa. Approximately half of the study designs (n=16) were randomized controlled trials, and half (n=15) were quasi-experimental. Interventions were heterogeneous. Among the 24 studies that reported on the main outcome of interest, 18 reported a positive intervention effect, with intervention recipients having greater contraceptive use in the first year postpartum.

Conclusion: While the studies in this systematic review were heterogeneous, the findings suggest that interventions that included a multifaceted package of initiatives appeared to be most likely to have a positive effect.

在中低收入国家采取产前护理干预措施以增加产后避孕药具的使用:系统回顾与叙述综述》。
导言:产后间隔期短带来的健康风险,以及妇女希望避免产后怀孕的愿望,凸显了实施有效产后计划生育计划的必要性。然而,在中低收入国家(LMICs),针对产前妇女采取干预措施以提高自愿产后计划生育的效果的证据却很有限。本系统综述旨在确定并描述低收入和中等收入国家试图通过接触产前孕妇来提高产后避孕药具使用率的干预措施:2012年1月至2022年7月期间发表的研究,只要是在低收入国家和地区进行的,评估了产前期间提供的干预措施,旨在影响产后避孕药具的使用,是实验性或准实验性的,并且是以法语或英语发表的,均被考虑在内。我们关注的主要结果是产后 1 年内避孕药具的使用情况,即数据收集时任何避孕方法的使用情况。我们检索了 EMBASE、Global Health 和 Medline,并人工检索了全文筛选所含研究的参考文献列表:我们对 771 条记录进行了双重筛选,并在综述中纳入了关于 31 种独特干预措施的 34 份报告。23 项研究发表于 2018 年,其中 21 项研究在撒哈拉以南非洲地区进行。大约一半的研究设计(n=16)是随机对照试验,一半(n=15)是准实验。干预措施各不相同。在 24 项报告了主要结果的研究中,18 项报告了积极的干预效果,即接受干预者在产后第一年使用避孕药具的比例增加:虽然本系统综述中的研究不尽相同,但研究结果表明,包含多方面一揽子措施的干预措施似乎最有可能产生积极效果。
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
Global Health: Science and Practice
Global Health: Science and Practice Medicine-Health Policy
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
7.50%
发文量
178
审稿时长
22 weeks
期刊介绍: Global Health: Science and Practice (GHSP) is a no-fee, open-access, peer-reviewed, online journal aimed to improve health practice, especially in low- and middle-income countries. Our goal is to reach those who design, implement, manage, evaluate, and otherwise support health programs. We are especially interested in advancing knowledge on practical program implementation issues, with information on what programs entail and how they are implemented. GHSP is currently indexed in PubMed, PubMed Central, POPLINE, EBSCO, SCOPUS,. the Web of Science Emerging Sources Citation Index, and the USAID Development Experience Clearinghouse (DEC). TOPICS: Issued four times a year, GHSP will include articles on all global health topics, covering diverse programming models and a wide range of cross-cutting issues that impact and support health systems. Examples include but are not limited to: Health: Addiction and harm reduction, Child Health, Communicable and Emerging Diseases, Disaster Preparedness and Response, Environmental Health, Family Planning/Reproductive Health, HIV/AIDS, Malaria, Maternal Health, Neglected Tropical Diseases, Non-Communicable Diseases/Injuries, Nutrition, Tuberculosis, Water and Sanitation. Cross-Cutting Issues: Epidemiology, Gender, Health Communication/Healthy Behavior, Health Policy and Advocacy, Health Systems, Human Resources/Training, Knowledge Management, Logistics and Supply Chain Management, Management and Governance, mHealth/eHealth/digital health, Monitoring and Evaluation, Scale Up, Youth.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信