乌干达计划生育知识、态度和使用方面的性别差异。

Afra Nuwasiima, Agnes Watsemba, Allan Eyapu, Peter Kaddu, Justin Loiseau
{"title":"乌干达计划生育知识、态度和使用方面的性别差异。","authors":"Afra Nuwasiima, Agnes Watsemba, Allan Eyapu, Peter Kaddu, Justin Loiseau","doi":"10.1186/s40834-021-00166-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Literature is satiated with studies focusing on knowledge, attitude, and practices of family planning (FP) among the female population, conversely, the gaps in sex-disaggregated data on FP continue to exist. This study sought to report sex differences existing in FP knowledge, attitude, and use in Uganda.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study uses data from a household survey that covered 16 districts in Uganda. Multi-stage cluster randomized sampling was employed for participant selection. Bivariate analysis for categorical data was conducted. Multilevel logistic regression model was applied to model the effects of socio-demographic characteristics on the use of modern FP methods.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Data from 4,352 respondents in the ratios of 70 % females and 30 % of males were analyzed. The mean age was 28.7 SD (8.5) and was not significantly different between males and females. More male respondents had secondary or higher level of education (44 %) than females (36 %). Knowledge of at least one modern FP method was high, but small significant differences were revealed between males (96 %) and females (98 %). Significant knowledge differences were seen in specific FP methods. A higher proportion of females (71 %) than males (67 %) perceived modern FP methods as always available in the community whereas more males (40 %) believed that modern FP methods can result in infertility than females (35 %). There was high self-efficacy about family planning methods use in both males and females. The proportion of married females that reported using or their partner using a modern FP method was 39 % compared to 45 % reported by the married males. Approx. 53 % of the males compared to 37 % of the females that reported condom use also cited STI/HIV prevention as the main reason for condom use suggesting dual protection as a driver for use. Males, young adults, the more educated, and those in marriage or active relationships were more likely to use modern FP methods.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our study found significant sex differences in knowledge, attitudes, and use of FP methods. The young adults and more educated respondents were more likely to use FP methods. The high self-efficacy observed for both males and females is a signal that both sexes can use FP methods. Project strategies and implementation should take into consideration the existing differences by sex and devise sex-tailored approaches to improve FP knowledge, attitudes, and use in this population. There was increased reporting of condom use as an FP and STI/HIV prevention method, follow-up studies aiming at succinctly measuring dual protection, and its drivers for both sex should be done.</p>","PeriodicalId":10637,"journal":{"name":"Contraception and Reproductive Medicine","volume":"6 1","pages":"23"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8325843/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Sex differences in family planning knowledge, attitudes, and use in Uganda.\",\"authors\":\"Afra Nuwasiima, Agnes Watsemba, Allan Eyapu, Peter Kaddu, Justin Loiseau\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s40834-021-00166-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Literature is satiated with studies focusing on knowledge, attitude, and practices of family planning (FP) among the female population, conversely, the gaps in sex-disaggregated data on FP continue to exist. This study sought to report sex differences existing in FP knowledge, attitude, and use in Uganda.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study uses data from a household survey that covered 16 districts in Uganda. Multi-stage cluster randomized sampling was employed for participant selection. Bivariate analysis for categorical data was conducted. Multilevel logistic regression model was applied to model the effects of socio-demographic characteristics on the use of modern FP methods.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Data from 4,352 respondents in the ratios of 70 % females and 30 % of males were analyzed. The mean age was 28.7 SD (8.5) and was not significantly different between males and females. More male respondents had secondary or higher level of education (44 %) than females (36 %). Knowledge of at least one modern FP method was high, but small significant differences were revealed between males (96 %) and females (98 %). Significant knowledge differences were seen in specific FP methods. A higher proportion of females (71 %) than males (67 %) perceived modern FP methods as always available in the community whereas more males (40 %) believed that modern FP methods can result in infertility than females (35 %). There was high self-efficacy about family planning methods use in both males and females. The proportion of married females that reported using or their partner using a modern FP method was 39 % compared to 45 % reported by the married males. Approx. 53 % of the males compared to 37 % of the females that reported condom use also cited STI/HIV prevention as the main reason for condom use suggesting dual protection as a driver for use. Males, young adults, the more educated, and those in marriage or active relationships were more likely to use modern FP methods.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our study found significant sex differences in knowledge, attitudes, and use of FP methods. The young adults and more educated respondents were more likely to use FP methods. The high self-efficacy observed for both males and females is a signal that both sexes can use FP methods. Project strategies and implementation should take into consideration the existing differences by sex and devise sex-tailored approaches to improve FP knowledge, attitudes, and use in this population. There was increased reporting of condom use as an FP and STI/HIV prevention method, follow-up studies aiming at succinctly measuring dual protection, and its drivers for both sex should be done.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10637,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Contraception and Reproductive Medicine\",\"volume\":\"6 1\",\"pages\":\"23\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8325843/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Contraception and Reproductive Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40834-021-00166-5\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Contraception and Reproductive Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40834-021-00166-5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:有关女性人口对计划生育(FP)的知识、态度和做法的研究已经很多,但有关计划生育的按性别分列的数据仍然存在差距。本研究旨在报告乌干达计划生育知识、态度和使用方面存在的性别差异:本研究使用的数据来自一项覆盖乌干达 16 个地区的家庭调查。在选择参与者时采用了多阶段分组随机抽样。对分类数据进行了二元分析。采用多层次逻辑回归模型来模拟社会人口特征对使用现代 FP 方法的影响:分析了 4,352 名受访者的数据,其中女性占 70%,男性占 30%。平均年龄为 28.7 SD (8.5),男女之间没有明显差异。受过中等或高等教育的男性受访者(44%)多于女性(36%)。对至少一种现代计划生育方法的了解程度较高,但男性(96%)和女性(98%)之间差异不大。对具体 FP 方法的了解程度存在显著差异。女性(71%)认为现代 FP 方法在社区中随时可用的比例高于男性(67%),而认为现代 FP 方法会导致不孕的男性(40%)高于女性(35%)。男性和女性对使用计划生育方法的自我效能感都很高。报告使用或其伴侣使用现代计划生育方法的已婚女性占 39%,而已婚男性占 45%。约 53%的男性(37%的女性)在报告使用安全套时,将预防性传播疾病/艾滋病毒作为使用安全套的主要原因,这表明双重保护是使用安全套的一个驱动因素。男性、青壮年、受教育程度较高者、已婚者或关系活跃者更有可能使用现代 FP 方法:我们的研究发现,在对计划生育方法的了解、态度和使用方面存在明显的性别差异。青壮年和受教育程度较高的受访者更有可能使用 FP 方法。男性和女性的自我效能感都很高,这表明两性都可以使用 FP 方法。项目战略和实施应考虑到现有的性别差异,并设计出适合不同性别的方法,以提高该人群对 FP 的认识、态度和使用。使用安全套作为 FP 和 STI/HIV 预防方法的报告有所增加,应开展后续研究,简明扼要地衡量双 重保护及其对两性的驱动力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Sex differences in family planning knowledge, attitudes, and use in Uganda.

Background: Literature is satiated with studies focusing on knowledge, attitude, and practices of family planning (FP) among the female population, conversely, the gaps in sex-disaggregated data on FP continue to exist. This study sought to report sex differences existing in FP knowledge, attitude, and use in Uganda.

Methods: This study uses data from a household survey that covered 16 districts in Uganda. Multi-stage cluster randomized sampling was employed for participant selection. Bivariate analysis for categorical data was conducted. Multilevel logistic regression model was applied to model the effects of socio-demographic characteristics on the use of modern FP methods.

Results: Data from 4,352 respondents in the ratios of 70 % females and 30 % of males were analyzed. The mean age was 28.7 SD (8.5) and was not significantly different between males and females. More male respondents had secondary or higher level of education (44 %) than females (36 %). Knowledge of at least one modern FP method was high, but small significant differences were revealed between males (96 %) and females (98 %). Significant knowledge differences were seen in specific FP methods. A higher proportion of females (71 %) than males (67 %) perceived modern FP methods as always available in the community whereas more males (40 %) believed that modern FP methods can result in infertility than females (35 %). There was high self-efficacy about family planning methods use in both males and females. The proportion of married females that reported using or their partner using a modern FP method was 39 % compared to 45 % reported by the married males. Approx. 53 % of the males compared to 37 % of the females that reported condom use also cited STI/HIV prevention as the main reason for condom use suggesting dual protection as a driver for use. Males, young adults, the more educated, and those in marriage or active relationships were more likely to use modern FP methods.

Conclusions: Our study found significant sex differences in knowledge, attitudes, and use of FP methods. The young adults and more educated respondents were more likely to use FP methods. The high self-efficacy observed for both males and females is a signal that both sexes can use FP methods. Project strategies and implementation should take into consideration the existing differences by sex and devise sex-tailored approaches to improve FP knowledge, attitudes, and use in this population. There was increased reporting of condom use as an FP and STI/HIV prevention method, follow-up studies aiming at succinctly measuring dual protection, and its drivers for both sex should be done.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Correction: Unintended pregnancy and contraceptive use among women in low- and middle-income countries: systematic review and meta-analysis Male characteristics and contraception in four districts of the central region, Ghana. Postpartum family planning uptake in Uganda: findings from the lot quality assurance sampling survey. Assessing the sustainability of two independent voucher-based family planning programs in Pakistan: a 24-months post-intervention evaluation. Emergency contraceptive use of Metronidazole among University female students in Dodoma region of Tanzania: a descriptive cross-sectional study.
×
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