Cargando…

Impact of the global gag rule on women’s contraceptive use and reproductive health outcomes in Ethiopia: a pre–post and difference-in-difference analysis

OBJECTIVE: To assess the impacts of the Protecting Life through Global Health Assistance policy (otherwise known as the expanded global gag rule (GGR)) on women’s sexual and reproductive health (SRH) in Ethiopia. The GGR prohibits all non-US non-governmental organisations (NGOs) receiving US Governm...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sully, Elizabeth A, Seme, Assefa, Shiferaw, Solomon, Chiu, Doris W, Bell, Suzanne O, Giorgio, Margaret
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10163537/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37147096
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-063099
_version_ 1785037902812545024
author Sully, Elizabeth A
Seme, Assefa
Shiferaw, Solomon
Chiu, Doris W
Bell, Suzanne O
Giorgio, Margaret
author_facet Sully, Elizabeth A
Seme, Assefa
Shiferaw, Solomon
Chiu, Doris W
Bell, Suzanne O
Giorgio, Margaret
author_sort Sully, Elizabeth A
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To assess the impacts of the Protecting Life through Global Health Assistance policy (otherwise known as the expanded global gag rule (GGR)) on women’s sexual and reproductive health (SRH) in Ethiopia. The GGR prohibits all non-US non-governmental organisations (NGOs) receiving US Government global health funding from providing, referring or advocating for abortion. DESIGN: Pre–post analysis and difference-in-difference analysis. SETTING: Six regions of Ethiopia (Tigray, Afar, Amhara, Oromiya, SNNPR and Addis Ababa). PARTICIPANTS: Panel of 4909 reproductive-age women recruited from the Performance Monitoring for Accountability 2018 survey, administered face-to-face surveys in 2018 and 2020. MEASURES: We assessed impacts of the GGR on contraceptive use, pregnancies, births and abortions. Due to the 2019 ‘Pompeo Expansion’ and widespread application of the GGR, we use a pre–post analysis to investigate changes in women’s reproductive outcomes. We then use a difference-in-differences design to measure the additional effect of NGOs refusal to comply with the policy and the resulting loss in funding; districts are classified as more exposed if organisations impacted by lost funding were providing services there and women are classified based on their district. RESULTS: At baseline, 27% (n=1365) of women were using a modern contraceptive (7% using long-acting reversible contraceptive methods (LARCs) and 20% using short-acting methods. The pre–post analysis revealed statistically significant declines from 2018 to 2020 in the use of LARCs (−0.9, 95% CI: −1.6 to –0.2) and short-acting methods (−1.0, 95% CI: −1.8 to –0.2). These changes were deviations from prior trends. In our difference-in-differences analysis, women exposed to non-compliant organisations experienced greater declines in LARC use (−1.5, 95% CI: −2.9 to –0.1) and short-acting method use (−1.7, 95% CI: −3.2 to –0.1) as compared with less-exposed women. CONCLUSIONS: The GGR resulted in a stagnation in the previous growth in contraceptive use in Ethiopia. Longer-term strategies are needed to ensure that SRH progress globally is protected from changes in US political administrations.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10163537
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-101635372023-05-07 Impact of the global gag rule on women’s contraceptive use and reproductive health outcomes in Ethiopia: a pre–post and difference-in-difference analysis Sully, Elizabeth A Seme, Assefa Shiferaw, Solomon Chiu, Doris W Bell, Suzanne O Giorgio, Margaret BMJ Open Health Policy OBJECTIVE: To assess the impacts of the Protecting Life through Global Health Assistance policy (otherwise known as the expanded global gag rule (GGR)) on women’s sexual and reproductive health (SRH) in Ethiopia. The GGR prohibits all non-US non-governmental organisations (NGOs) receiving US Government global health funding from providing, referring or advocating for abortion. DESIGN: Pre–post analysis and difference-in-difference analysis. SETTING: Six regions of Ethiopia (Tigray, Afar, Amhara, Oromiya, SNNPR and Addis Ababa). PARTICIPANTS: Panel of 4909 reproductive-age women recruited from the Performance Monitoring for Accountability 2018 survey, administered face-to-face surveys in 2018 and 2020. MEASURES: We assessed impacts of the GGR on contraceptive use, pregnancies, births and abortions. Due to the 2019 ‘Pompeo Expansion’ and widespread application of the GGR, we use a pre–post analysis to investigate changes in women’s reproductive outcomes. We then use a difference-in-differences design to measure the additional effect of NGOs refusal to comply with the policy and the resulting loss in funding; districts are classified as more exposed if organisations impacted by lost funding were providing services there and women are classified based on their district. RESULTS: At baseline, 27% (n=1365) of women were using a modern contraceptive (7% using long-acting reversible contraceptive methods (LARCs) and 20% using short-acting methods. The pre–post analysis revealed statistically significant declines from 2018 to 2020 in the use of LARCs (−0.9, 95% CI: −1.6 to –0.2) and short-acting methods (−1.0, 95% CI: −1.8 to –0.2). These changes were deviations from prior trends. In our difference-in-differences analysis, women exposed to non-compliant organisations experienced greater declines in LARC use (−1.5, 95% CI: −2.9 to –0.1) and short-acting method use (−1.7, 95% CI: −3.2 to –0.1) as compared with less-exposed women. CONCLUSIONS: The GGR resulted in a stagnation in the previous growth in contraceptive use in Ethiopia. Longer-term strategies are needed to ensure that SRH progress globally is protected from changes in US political administrations. BMJ Publishing Group 2023-05-05 /pmc/articles/PMC10163537/ /pubmed/37147096 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-063099 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Health Policy
Sully, Elizabeth A
Seme, Assefa
Shiferaw, Solomon
Chiu, Doris W
Bell, Suzanne O
Giorgio, Margaret
Impact of the global gag rule on women’s contraceptive use and reproductive health outcomes in Ethiopia: a pre–post and difference-in-difference analysis
title Impact of the global gag rule on women’s contraceptive use and reproductive health outcomes in Ethiopia: a pre–post and difference-in-difference analysis
title_full Impact of the global gag rule on women’s contraceptive use and reproductive health outcomes in Ethiopia: a pre–post and difference-in-difference analysis
title_fullStr Impact of the global gag rule on women’s contraceptive use and reproductive health outcomes in Ethiopia: a pre–post and difference-in-difference analysis
title_full_unstemmed Impact of the global gag rule on women’s contraceptive use and reproductive health outcomes in Ethiopia: a pre–post and difference-in-difference analysis
title_short Impact of the global gag rule on women’s contraceptive use and reproductive health outcomes in Ethiopia: a pre–post and difference-in-difference analysis
title_sort impact of the global gag rule on women’s contraceptive use and reproductive health outcomes in ethiopia: a pre–post and difference-in-difference analysis
topic Health Policy
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10163537/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37147096
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-063099
work_keys_str_mv AT sullyelizabetha impactoftheglobalgagruleonwomenscontraceptiveuseandreproductivehealthoutcomesinethiopiaaprepostanddifferenceindifferenceanalysis
AT semeassefa impactoftheglobalgagruleonwomenscontraceptiveuseandreproductivehealthoutcomesinethiopiaaprepostanddifferenceindifferenceanalysis
AT shiferawsolomon impactoftheglobalgagruleonwomenscontraceptiveuseandreproductivehealthoutcomesinethiopiaaprepostanddifferenceindifferenceanalysis
AT chiudorisw impactoftheglobalgagruleonwomenscontraceptiveuseandreproductivehealthoutcomesinethiopiaaprepostanddifferenceindifferenceanalysis
AT bellsuzanneo impactoftheglobalgagruleonwomenscontraceptiveuseandreproductivehealthoutcomesinethiopiaaprepostanddifferenceindifferenceanalysis
AT giorgiomargaret impactoftheglobalgagruleonwomenscontraceptiveuseandreproductivehealthoutcomesinethiopiaaprepostanddifferenceindifferenceanalysis