MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2950213656 · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1002832

Provision of family planning vouchers and early initiation of postpartum contraceptive use among women living with HIV in southwestern Uganda: A randomized controlled trial

2019· article· en· W2950213656 sur OpenAlexaff
Esther C. Atukunda, Godfrey Mugyenyi, Celestino Obua, Elly Atuhumuza, Edward John Lukyamuzi, Angela Kaida, Amon Ganafa Agaba, Lynn T. Matthews

Notice bibliographique

RevuePLoS Medicine · 2019
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueHIV/AIDS Research and Interventions
Établissements canadiensSimon Fraser University
Organismes subventionnairesFogarty International CenterNational Institutes of Health
Mots-clésMedicineFamily planningRandomized controlled trialPregnancyPostpartum periodVoucherReferralDiscontinuationPopulationObstetricsPediatricsFamily medicineEnvironmental healthInternal medicine

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Unwanted pregnancies remain a burden for women living with HIV (WLWH). Family planning prevents unplanned pregnancies while promoting longer birth intervals, key strategies to eliminate perinatal transmission of HIV and promote maternal and child health. We evaluated the effect of a family planning voucher, inclusive of immediate postpartum counseling, on uptake, early initiation, and continuation of modern contraceptive methods among recently postpartum WLWH delivering at a publicly funded regional referral hospital in rural, southwestern Uganda. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We performed a randomized controlled trial between October, 2016 and June, 2018 at a referral hospital in southwestern Uganda. This interim analysis includes adult WLWH randomized and enrolled equally to receive a family planning voucher or standard of care (control). Enrolled postpartum WLWH completed an interviewer-administered questionnaire at enrollment and 6 months postpartum. Our primary outcome of interest for this analysis is initiation of a modern family planning method within 8 weeks postpartum. Secondary outcomes included family planning initiation at 12, 14, 16, and 20 weeks postpartum, family planning discontinuation and/or change, pregnancy incidence, and mean time without contraception. The trial was registered with clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02964169). At enrollment, half of the women in both the voucher (N = 87, 55%) and control (N = 86, 54%) groups wanted to have a child in 2 years postpartum. Over 80% of referent pregnancies in the voucher (N = 136, 86%) and control (N = 128, 81%) groups were planned. All women were accessing ART. The mean CD4 count was 396 cells/mm3 (SD = 61) for those enrolled in the control group versus 393 cells/mm3 (SD = 64) in the family planning voucher group. By 8 weeks postpartum, family planning was initiated in 144 (91%) participants in the voucher group and 83 (52%) participants in the control group (odds ratio [OR] 9.42; CI 4.67-13.97, P < 0.001). We also found high family planning uptake rates for both groups, with higher rates among the intervention group at 12 weeks (OR 5.66; CI 2.65-12.12, P < 0.001), 14 weeks (OR 2.51; CI 1.31-4.79, P < 0.001), 16 weeks (OR 4.02; CI 1.66-9.77, P = 0.001), and 20 weeks (OR 3.65; CI 1.40-9.47, P = 0.004) postpartum. The average time to family planning initiation was reduced to 5.9 weeks (SD = 2.4) for those in the voucher group compared to 9.3 weeks (SD = 5) in the control (P < 0.001). One pregnancy was recorded in the group receiving standard of care; none were reported in the voucher group. Method mix did not differ by group: injectables were selected by most women (N = 150, 50%), and 52% of this proportion were in the experimental arm, with <10% in each arm selecting condoms, oral contraception, or intrauterine devices (IUDs). Similar proportions of women changed contraceptive methods over the 6-month follow-up in the voucher and control groups (N = 8, 5% versus N = 5, 4%; P = 0.467). More women in the control group discontinued contraception for 1 to 2 weeks (N = 19, 13% versus N = 7, 5%; P = 0.008) or more than 4 weeks (N = 15, 10% versus N = 3, 2%; P = 0.002) compared to those given a family planning voucher. The main limitation of this study is that its findings may not be generalized to settings without improved availability of contraceptives in publicly funded facilities. CONCLUSION: These findings indicate that a well-structured, time-bound family planning voucher program appeared to increase early postpartum contraceptive uptake and continuation in a setting in which users are faced with financial, knowledge, and structural barriers to contraceptive services. Further work should clarify the role of vouchers in empowering WLWH to avoid unintended pregnancies over time. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02964169.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Essai randomisé · Signal consensuel: Essai randomisé
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,151
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,550

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,005
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0020,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,024
Tête enseignante GPT0,293
Écart entre enseignants0,269 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeEssai randomisé
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations17
Publié2019
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revuePLoS MedicineMême sujetHIV/AIDS Research and InterventionsTravaux en français237 207