The Effect of Integrating Family Planning with HIV and Aids Services on Contraceptives Uptake among HIV Positive Women

K. Lulu, T. Nigatu, M. Belachew, G. Kassie, E. Oliveras, Adugna Tamiru, A. Mekonnen, M. Fantahun, Amanuel Kidane, S. Hagos
{"title":"The Effect of Integrating Family Planning with HIV and Aids Services on Contraceptives Uptake among HIV Positive Women","authors":"K. Lulu, T. Nigatu, M. Belachew, G. Kassie, E. Oliveras, Adugna Tamiru, A. Mekonnen, M. Fantahun, Amanuel Kidane, S. Hagos","doi":"10.4172/2167-0420.1000197","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Integrating Family Planning (FP) into HIV services provides opportunity to increase access to contraception among clients. However, data on the effectiveness of FP/HIV integration on FP uptake is limited. \nObjective: Determine the effect of FP/HIV services integration, focusing on FP integration with Antiretroviral Therapy (ART) \nMethods: A cross-sectional comparative design was conducted in facilities with and without FP/ART integration in four major regions of Ethiopia. The study population included HIV positive women attending ART clinics. Data were collected using structured questionnaire from 843 and 691 HIV positive women in intervention and comparison facilities respectively from April 23 to May 2, 2012. Data entry and analysis was done using SPSS version 17.0 and proportions and relevant associations were computed. \nResults: Most of the women (94.7%) received one or more HIV services. In both groups, 736 (48.2%) women used any type of FP method; the majority (97%) used modern FP and 54.6% used injectables. Over all CPR was 48%; with higher CPR in intervention than comparison group (52.6 %versus 42.9%) [AOR (95%CI) =1.23, (1.23, 1.92). A higher proportion of women in intervention than comparison group used dual methods [AOR (95%CI) =1.50 (1.01, 2.2)]. Total unmet need for FP in the study was 16.2 percent. There was no significant difference in unmet need for FP between intervention and comparison groups (15.7% vs. 16.9% respectively) [(OR 0.94 95% CI (0.63, 1.39)]. \nConclusion and Recommendation: FP/HIV integration improved CPR and use of dual methods showing the benefit of FP/HIV integration. However, there was no difference in unmet need for FP between the two groups calling the need for more research.","PeriodicalId":17626,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Womens Health Care","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Womens Health Care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4172/2167-0420.1000197","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Background: Integrating Family Planning (FP) into HIV services provides opportunity to increase access to contraception among clients. However, data on the effectiveness of FP/HIV integration on FP uptake is limited. Objective: Determine the effect of FP/HIV services integration, focusing on FP integration with Antiretroviral Therapy (ART) Methods: A cross-sectional comparative design was conducted in facilities with and without FP/ART integration in four major regions of Ethiopia. The study population included HIV positive women attending ART clinics. Data were collected using structured questionnaire from 843 and 691 HIV positive women in intervention and comparison facilities respectively from April 23 to May 2, 2012. Data entry and analysis was done using SPSS version 17.0 and proportions and relevant associations were computed. Results: Most of the women (94.7%) received one or more HIV services. In both groups, 736 (48.2%) women used any type of FP method; the majority (97%) used modern FP and 54.6% used injectables. Over all CPR was 48%; with higher CPR in intervention than comparison group (52.6 %versus 42.9%) [AOR (95%CI) =1.23, (1.23, 1.92). A higher proportion of women in intervention than comparison group used dual methods [AOR (95%CI) =1.50 (1.01, 2.2)]. Total unmet need for FP in the study was 16.2 percent. There was no significant difference in unmet need for FP between intervention and comparison groups (15.7% vs. 16.9% respectively) [(OR 0.94 95% CI (0.63, 1.39)]. Conclusion and Recommendation: FP/HIV integration improved CPR and use of dual methods showing the benefit of FP/HIV integration. However, there was no difference in unmet need for FP between the two groups calling the need for more research.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
计划生育与艾滋病毒和艾滋病服务相结合对艾滋病毒阳性妇女避孕药具使用的影响
背景:将计划生育(FP)纳入艾滋病毒服务提供了增加客户获得避孕的机会。然而,关于计划生育/艾滋病毒整合对计划生育摄取有效性的数据是有限的。目的:确定计划生育/艾滋病毒服务整合的效果,重点是计划生育与抗逆转录病毒治疗(ART)方法的整合:在埃塞俄比亚四个主要地区的计划生育/抗逆转录病毒治疗整合和不整合的设施中进行了横断面比较设计。研究人群包括在抗逆转录病毒治疗诊所就诊的艾滋病毒阳性妇女。采用结构化问卷收集2012年4月23日至5月2日在干预机构和比较机构分别就诊的843名和691名HIV阳性妇女的数据。使用SPSS 17.0版本进行数据录入和分析,并计算比例和相关关联。结果:绝大多数妇女(94.7%)接受了一项或多项艾滋病毒服务。在两组中,736名(48.2%)妇女使用任何类型的计划生育方法;大多数(97%)使用现代计划生育,54.6%使用注射剂。总体而言,CPR为48%;干预组CPR高于对照组(52.6%比42.9%)[AOR (95%CI) =1.23,(1.23, 1.92)]。干预组妇女比例高于双方法对照组[AOR (95%CI) =1.50(1.01, 2.2)]。研究中未满足计划生育需求的总比例为16.2%。未满足的计划生育需求在干预组和对照组之间无显著差异(分别为15.7%和16.9%)[OR 0.94 95% CI(0.63, 1.39)]。结论和建议:计划生育/艾滋病毒整合改善了心肺复苏术,使用双重方法显示计划生育/艾滋病毒整合的好处。然而,在未满足的计划生育需求方面,两组之间没有差异,需要进行更多的研究。
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 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Overview of breast reconstruction options and latest advances and controversies The treatment of acne as a strategy to improve contraceptive adherence in Colombian young women Complementary Alternate Medicine (CAM) therapy against biomarker of oral and breast cancer in women treated with conventional medicine Bacteriocin production by Lactobacillus crispatus vaginal isolates PIH as a complication of pregnancy in the patient with rare disease mastocytosis
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1