Does abolishing user fees for family planning increase contraception use? An impact evaluation of the national policy in Burkina Faso

BACKGROUND: Unmet needs for contraception constitute a major public health problem in sub-Saharan Africa. Several mechanisms have been tested to reduce the financial barrier and facilitate access to family planning services, with inconclusive results. Based on the positive impacts following the introduction of free health care for pregnant women, Burkina Faso decided to extend its national policy and abolished direct payment for family planning services. This study aims to evaluate the impact of this policy on contraceptive use and unmet needs for contraception among women of reproductive age (WRA) in Burkina Faso. METHODS: This study uses two different study designs to examine the impact of a user fee removal policy on contraceptive use across a panel of 1400 households randomly selected across eight health districts. Data were collected using a standardized socio-demographic questionnaire at three different time points during the pilot and scale-up phases of the fee abolition program. The questionnaire was administered six months after the launch of the pilot fee abolition program in four health districts. For the remaining four health districts, the survey was conducted one year prior to and six months after the implementation of the program in those areas. All WRA in the households were eligible to participate. A cross-sectional study design was used to determine the association between knowledge of the fee abolition policy among WRA and actual use of contraceptives by WRA six months after the policy’s implementation and across all eight districts. Additionally, a pre-post study with a non-randomized, reflexive control group was designed using repeated surveys in four health districts. Hierarchical logistic mixed effects models were adjusted for a set of time-variant individual variables; the impact was assessed by a difference-in-differences approach that compared pre-post changes in contraception use in women who knew about the new policy and those who did not. RESULTS: Of the 1471 WRA surveyed six months after the removal of user fees for family planning services, 56% were aware of the policy’s existence. Knowledge of the fee abolition policy was associated with a 46% increase probability of contraceptive use among WRA six months after the policy’s implementation. Among the subset of the participants who were surveyed twice (n = 507), 65% knew about the fee removal policy six months after its introduction and constitute the intervention group. Pre-post changes in contraceptive use differed significantly between the intervention (n = 327) and control groups (n = 180). Removing user fees for family planning led to an 86% (95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.49, 1.31) increase in the likelihood of using contraception. In the study area, the policy reduced the prevalence of unmet needs for contraception by 13 percentage points. CONCLUSIONS: Removing user fees for family planning services is a promising strategy to increase access to, and reduce unmet needs for, contraception. A broader dissemination of the policy’s existence will likely increase its impact on the overall population.