Open Access Journal of Contraception (Dec 2019)
Are Women In Lomé Getting Their Desired Methods Of Contraception? Understanding Provider Bias From Restrictions To Choice
Abstract
Elizabeth Pleasants,1 Tekou B Koffi,2 Karen Weidert,1 Sandra I McCoy,1 Ndola Prata1 1School of Public Health, University of California at Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, USA; 2Cabinet De Recherche Et D’évaluation (CERA), Lomé, TogoCorrespondence: Ndola PrataSchool of Public Health, University of California at Berkeley, 2121 Berkeley Way West, #6142, Berkeley, CA 94720, USATel +1 510-642-6915Email [email protected]: Despite improvements in contraception availability, women face persistent barriers that compromise reproductive autonomy and informed choice. Provider bias is one way in which access to contraception can be restricted within clinical encounters and has been established as common in sub-Saharan Africa. This analysis assessed the prevalence of provider restrictions and the potential impact on women’s method uptake in Lomé, Togo.Methods: This sub-analysis used survey data from provider and client interviews collected to assess the impacts of the Agir pour la Planification Familiale (AgirPF) program in Togo. The relationships between provider restrictiveness and women’s receipt of their desired method of contraception were modelled using mixed effects logistic regressions looking at all women and among subgroups hypothesized to be at potentially higher risk of bias.Results: Around 84% of providers reported a restriction in contraceptive provision for the five contraceptive methods explored (pill, male condom, injectable, IUD, and implant). Around 53% of providers reported restricting at least four of the five methods based on age, parity, partner consent, or marital status. Among all women, there were no significant associations between provider restrictiveness and women’s receipt of desired method, including among those who desired long-acting methods. In adjusted modeling, marital status was a covariate significantly associated with desired method, with married women more likely to receive their desired method than unmarried women (aOR 2.73, 95% CI 1.45–5.13).Conclusion: Provider reports of high levels of restrictions in this population are concerning and should be further explored, especially its effects on unmarried women. However, restrictions reported by providers in this study did not appear to statistically significantly influence contraceptive method received.Keywords: provider bias, provider restrictions, contraception, Togo
