Cargando…

Contraceptive Method Mix: Updates and Implications

CONTEXT: Improving contraceptive method choice is a goal of international family planning. Method mix—the percentage distribution of total contraceptive use across various methods—reflects both supply (availability of affordable methods) and demand (client preferences). We analyze changes in method...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bertrand, Jane T., Ross, John, Sullivan, Tara M., Hardee, Karen, Shelton, James D.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Global Health: Science and Practice 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7784075/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33361234
http://dx.doi.org/10.9745/GHSP-D-20-00229
_version_ 1783632231083802624
author Bertrand, Jane T.
Ross, John
Sullivan, Tara M.
Hardee, Karen
Shelton, James D.
author_facet Bertrand, Jane T.
Ross, John
Sullivan, Tara M.
Hardee, Karen
Shelton, James D.
author_sort Bertrand, Jane T.
collection PubMed
description CONTEXT: Improving contraceptive method choice is a goal of international family planning. Method mix—the percentage distribution of total contraceptive use across various methods—reflects both supply (availability of affordable methods) and demand (client preferences). We analyze changes in method mix, regional contrasts, and the relationship of the mix to contraceptive prevalence. METHODS: We use 789 national surveys from the 1960s through 2019, from 113 developing countries with at least 1 million people and with data on use of 8 contraceptive methods. Two measures assess the “evenness” of the mix: method skew (more than 50% use is by 1 method), and the average deviation (AD) of the 8 methods’ shares from their mean value. Population weighted and unweighted results are compared because they can differ substantially. RESULTS: Use of traditional methods has declined but still represents 11% of all use (population weighted) or 17% (unweighted country average). Vasectomy’s share was historically low with the exception of a few countries but is now even lower. The previous trend toward greater overall evenness in the mix has slowed recently. Sub-Saharan Africa shows a hormonal method progression from oral contraceptives to injectables to implants in a substantial number of countries. In some countries with high HIV prevalence, the condom share has increased. The leading method’s share differs by region: female sterilization in Asia (39%) and in Latin America (31%), the pill in the Middle East/North Africa (32%), and the injectable in sub-Saharan Africa (36%). Method skew persists in 30% of countries. “Evenness” of mix is not related to contraceptive prevalence. CONCLUSION: The marked diversity in predominant methods underscores the conclusion that no single method mix is ideal or appropriate everywhere. But that diversity across countries, coupled with the persisting high degree of extreme skewness in many of them, argues for continued concerted efforts for programs to increase method choice.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7784075
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Global Health: Science and Practice
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-77840752021-02-24 Contraceptive Method Mix: Updates and Implications Bertrand, Jane T. Ross, John Sullivan, Tara M. Hardee, Karen Shelton, James D. Glob Health Sci Pract Original Article CONTEXT: Improving contraceptive method choice is a goal of international family planning. Method mix—the percentage distribution of total contraceptive use across various methods—reflects both supply (availability of affordable methods) and demand (client preferences). We analyze changes in method mix, regional contrasts, and the relationship of the mix to contraceptive prevalence. METHODS: We use 789 national surveys from the 1960s through 2019, from 113 developing countries with at least 1 million people and with data on use of 8 contraceptive methods. Two measures assess the “evenness” of the mix: method skew (more than 50% use is by 1 method), and the average deviation (AD) of the 8 methods’ shares from their mean value. Population weighted and unweighted results are compared because they can differ substantially. RESULTS: Use of traditional methods has declined but still represents 11% of all use (population weighted) or 17% (unweighted country average). Vasectomy’s share was historically low with the exception of a few countries but is now even lower. The previous trend toward greater overall evenness in the mix has slowed recently. Sub-Saharan Africa shows a hormonal method progression from oral contraceptives to injectables to implants in a substantial number of countries. In some countries with high HIV prevalence, the condom share has increased. The leading method’s share differs by region: female sterilization in Asia (39%) and in Latin America (31%), the pill in the Middle East/North Africa (32%), and the injectable in sub-Saharan Africa (36%). Method skew persists in 30% of countries. “Evenness” of mix is not related to contraceptive prevalence. CONCLUSION: The marked diversity in predominant methods underscores the conclusion that no single method mix is ideal or appropriate everywhere. But that diversity across countries, coupled with the persisting high degree of extreme skewness in many of them, argues for continued concerted efforts for programs to increase method choice. Global Health: Science and Practice 2020-12-23 /pmc/articles/PMC7784075/ /pubmed/33361234 http://dx.doi.org/10.9745/GHSP-D-20-00229 Text en © Bertrand et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly cited. To view a copy of the license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. When linking to this article, please use the following permanent link: https://doi.org/10.9745/GHSP-D-20-00229
spellingShingle Original Article
Bertrand, Jane T.
Ross, John
Sullivan, Tara M.
Hardee, Karen
Shelton, James D.
Contraceptive Method Mix: Updates and Implications
title Contraceptive Method Mix: Updates and Implications
title_full Contraceptive Method Mix: Updates and Implications
title_fullStr Contraceptive Method Mix: Updates and Implications
title_full_unstemmed Contraceptive Method Mix: Updates and Implications
title_short Contraceptive Method Mix: Updates and Implications
title_sort contraceptive method mix: updates and implications
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7784075/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33361234
http://dx.doi.org/10.9745/GHSP-D-20-00229
work_keys_str_mv AT bertrandjanet contraceptivemethodmixupdatesandimplications
AT rossjohn contraceptivemethodmixupdatesandimplications
AT sullivantaram contraceptivemethodmixupdatesandimplications
AT hardeekaren contraceptivemethodmixupdatesandimplications
AT sheltonjamesd contraceptivemethodmixupdatesandimplications