Abstract
Objectives
Study design
Results
Conclusions
Implications
Keywords
1. Introduction
- Population Reference Bureau
- Castle S.
- Askew I.
2. Materials and methods
2.1 Study design, sites and participants
2.2 Study procedures
- World Health Organization Department of Reproductive Health and Research (WHO/RHR) and Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health/Center for Communication Programs (CCP), Knowledge for Health Project
2.3 Sample size
2.4 Data collection and analysis
- World Health Organization Department of Reproductive Health and Research (WHO/RHR) and Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health/Center for Communication Programs (CCP), Knowledge for Health Project
2.5 Confidentiality and ethical approvals
3. Results
3.1 Participant background
Self-injected DMPA-SC (n=649) | Provider-injected DMPA-IM (n=649) | p value | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
% or mean | n | % or mean | n | ||
Mean age (SD) | 28.8 (6.2) | 649 | 29.4 (6.3) | 649 | .11 |
Married or cohabiting | 97.7 | 634 | 98.2 | 637 | .56 |
Mean parity (SD) | 2.8 (1.8) | 649 | 3.2 (1.9) | 649 | .00 |
Education level | 331 | .00 | |||
None | 37.1 | 241 | 51.0 | 177 | |
Primary | 31.6 | 205 | 27.3 | 127 | |
Secondary | 25.3 | 164 | 19.6 | 14 | |
University | 6.0 | 39 | 2.2 | ||
Working outside the home | 41.5 | 269 | 40.7 | 264 | .78 |
Collects paycheck | 10.6 | 69 | 10.5 | 68 | .93 |
Mean number of household assets (SD) | 9.9 (3.3) | 649 | 9.5 (3.1) | 649 | .02 |
Mean travel time RT to facility, min (SD) | 54.0 (47.5) | 649 | 57.2 (45.6) | 649 | .21 |
Paid to travel to facility | 35.0 | 227 | 43.8 | 284 | .00 |
First-time contraceptive user | 10.8 | 70 | 11.6 | 75 | .66 |
Current or past injectable user | 87.1 | 565 | 85.7 | 556 | .47 |
Current or past DMPA-SC user | 39.5 | 256 | 8.6 | 56 | .00 |
Injection anxiety | .00 | ||||
Low | 70.6 | 458 | 50.7 | 329 | |
Moderate | 24.7 | 160 | 29.9 | 194 | |
High | 4.8 | 31 | 19.4 | 126 | |
Mean number of methods ever used (SD) | 1.4 (0.8) | 649 | 1.3 (0.7) | 649 | .06 |
Husband supports use of family planning | 87.4 | 567 | 85.1 | 552 | .23 |
Family planning decisions made jointly | 59.9 | 389 | 55.5 | 360 | .10 |
3.2 Self-injection experience
Injection 2 (n=619) | Injection 3 (n=589) | Injection 4 (n=565) | |
---|---|---|---|
Reported challenges with device storage prior to injection | 6/576 (1.0) | 7 (1.2) | 10 (1.8) |
Reported injection very easy to administer | 547 (88.4) | 550 (93.4) | 548 (97.0) |
Sought injection help from providers, family or friends | 65 (10.5) | 37 (6.3) | 21 (3.7) |
Used the booklet during self-injection | 594 (96.0) | 539 (91.5) | 480 (85.0) |
Used the calendar to schedule next injection | 450 (72.7) | 429 (72.8) | 341 (60.4) |
Correctly identified next injection date | 479 (77.4) | 457 (77.6) | 434 (76.8) |
Kept used needle in container prior to disposal | 417/576a (72.4) | 376 (63.8) | 311 (55.0) |
3.3 Continuation

3.4 Determinants of discontinuation
Variable | Adjusted hazard ratio (95% CI) | p value |
---|---|---|
Self-injection client | 0.72 (0.56–0.93) | .00 |
Age | 1.17 (1.00–1.38) | .06 |
Age (squared) | 1.00 (0.99–1.00) | .07 |
Parity | 0.87 (0.80–0.94) | .00 |
Education (reference: no education) | ||
Primary | 0.70 (0.53–0.92) | .01 |
Secondary and higher | 0.67 (0.47–0.95) | .03 |
Total household assets | 0.96 (0.92–0.99) | .01 |
Clinic in a rural location | 1.14 (0.74–1.74) | .56 |
Pay for travel to clinic | 1.30 (1.04–1.62) | .02 |
Experienced side effects | 1.69 (1.09–2.63) | .02 |
3.5 Reasons for discontinuation
Self-injected DMPA-SC (n=123) | Provider-injected DMPA-IM (n=182) | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
% | n | % | n | |
Forgot/late for injection | 44.7 | 55 | 44.5 | 81 |
Husband disapproval | 23.8 | 29 | 9.0 | 16 |
To have a baby | 21.1 | 26 | 18.1 | 33 |
Side effects | 6.5 | 8 | 13.7 | 25 |
Challenges with self-injection | 5.7 | 7 | -- | -- |
No sexual relations | 4.9 | 6 | 9.3 | 17 |
Access challenges/stockouts | 3.3 | 4 | 3.9 | 7 |
Got pregnant | 0.0 | 0 | 0.6 | 1 |
3.6 Experience of pregnancy, serious adverse events, side effects and injection-site reactions
After 1st injection | After 2nd injection | After 3rd injection | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Self-injected DMPA-SC (n=649) | Provider-injected DMPA-IM (n=642) | p value | Self-injected DMPA-SC (n=615) | Provider-injected DMPA-IM (n=598) | p value | Self-injected DMPA-SC (n=588) | Provider-injected DMPA-IM (n=559) | p value | |
Experienced side effects | 195 (30.1) | 227 (35.4) | .04 | 130 (21.1) | 155 (25.9) | .05 | 102 (17.4) | 125 (22.4) | .03 |
Sought treatment | 18/195 (9.2) | 50/227 (22.0) | .00 | 17/130 (13.1) | 32/155 (20.6) | .09 | 16/102 (15.7) | 28/125 (22.4) | .20 |
Experienced ISR | 89 (13.7) | 63 (9.8) | .03 | 52 (8.5) | 55 (9.2) | .65 | 29 (4.9) | 30 (5.4) | .74 |
Sought ISR treatment | 0/89 (0.0) | 0/63 (0.0) | - | 0/52 (0.0) | 0/55 (0.0) | - | 0/29 (0.0) | 1/30 (3.3) | .32 |
4. Discussion
4.1 Limitations of the study
- MacLachlan E.
- Atuyambe L.M.
- Millogo T.
- Guiella G.
- Yaro S.
- Kasasa S.
- et al.
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Observation checklist used to assess women's competency with self-injection.
References
- World population data sheet.https://www.prb.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/2017_World_Population.pdfDate: 2017Date accessed: July 10, 2018
- Senegal Enquête Démographique et de Santé Continue (EDS-Continue) 2016.ANSD and ICF, Rockville, Maryland, USA2017
- Contraceptive discontinuation: reasons, challenges and solutions.Population Councilhttp://www.familyplanning2020.org/microsite/contraceptive-discontinuationDate: 2015Date accessed: August 17, 2018
- Evaluating the feasibility and acceptability of self-injection of subcutaneous depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA) in Senegal: a prospective cohort study.Contraception. 2017; 96: 203-210
- A prospective cohort study of the feasibility and acceptability of depot medroxyprogesterone acetate administered subcutaneously through self-injection.Contraception. 2017; 95: 306-311
- Client and provider experiences with self-administration of subcutaneous depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA-SC) in Malawi.Contraception. 2018; 98: 405-410
- Pilot study of home self-administration of subcutaneous depo-medroxyprogesterone acetate for contraception.Contraception. 2012; 85: 458-464
- Self-administration of subcutaneous depot medroxyprogesterone acetate for contraception: feasibility and acceptability.Contraception. 2012; 85: 453-457
- Randomized clinical trial of self versus clinical administration of subcutaneous depot medroxyprogesterone acetate.Contraception. 2014; 89: 352-356
- Self-administration of injectable contraceptives: a systematic review.BJOG. 2017; 124: 200-208
- Effect of self-administration versus provider-administered injection of subcutaneous depot medroxyprogesterone acetate on continuation rates in Malawi: a randomised controlled trial.Lancet Glob Health. 2018; 6: e568-e578
- Increased 1-year continuation of DMPA among women randomized to self-administration: results from a randomized controlled trial at Planned Parenthood.Contraception. 2018; 97: 198-204
- Continuation of injectable contraception when self-injected v. administered by a facility-based health worker: A non-randomized, prospective cohort study in Uganda.Contraception. 2018; 98: 383-388
- Family planning: a global handbook for providers (2018 update).(Available at:)CCP and WHOBaltimore and GenevaDate: 2018
- Uganda demographic and health survey 2016.UBOS and ICF, Kampala, Uganda and Rockville, Maryland, USA2018
- Strategies to improve adherence and acceptability of hormonal methods of contraception.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013; 10CD004317.
- Mobile phone-based interventions for improving contraception use.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015; 6CD011159
- Health worker roles in providing safe abortion care and post-abortion contraception.WHO, Geneva2015
- Continuation of subcutaneous or intramuscular injectable contraception when administered by facility-based and community health workers: findings from a prospective cohort study in Burkina Faso and Uganda.Contraception. 2018; 98: 423-429
Article info
Publication history
Footnotes
☆Funding sources: This work was supported by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Seattle, WA, (OPP1060986), and the Children's Investment Fund Foundation, London, UK (Request #333). The funders did not play a role in data collection, analysis, interpretation of data, the writing of the report or the decision to submit the article for publication.
☆☆Conflicts of interest: none.
★Clinical Trial Registration Number: N/A.
Identification
Copyright
User license
Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) |
Permitted
- Read, print & download
- Redistribute or republish the final article
- Text & data mine
- Translate the article
- Reuse portions or extracts from the article in other works
- Sell or re-use for commercial purposes
Elsevier's open access license policy