Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25611479›Full record

ArticleGlobal health, science and practice2014

Policy and programmatic considerations for introducing a longer-acting injectable contraceptive: perspectives of stakeholders from Kenya and Rwanda.

Kevin McKenna, Jennet Arcara, Kate H Rademacher, Caroline Mackenzie, Fidele Ngabo, Emmanuel Munyambanza, Jennifer Wesson, Elizabeth E Tolley

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Global health, science and practice, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. A better future for injectable contraception?Global health, science and practice · 2014
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Kevin McKennaFHI 360, Durham, NC, USA kmckenna@fhi360.org.
Jennet ArcaraUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Kate H RademacherFHI 360, Durham, NC, USA.
Caroline MackenzieFHI 360, Nairobi, Kenya. Now with Ipsos, Nairobi, Kenya.
Fidele NgaboMinistry of Health, Kigali, Rwanda.
Emmanuel MunyambanzaFHI 360, Kigali, Rwanda. Now with Company for Research in Social, Behavior and Health (RSH) Ltd, Kigali, Rwanda.
Jennifer WessonFHI 360, Kigali, Rwanda. Now with IntraHealth International, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Elizabeth E TolleyFHI 360, Durham, NC, USA.
Family Health International 360 · USDurham University · GBIntraHealth International · USMinistry of Health · RWUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMore than 40 million women use injectable contraceptives to prevent pregnancy, and most current or previous injectable users report being satisfied with the method. However, while women may find injectables acceptable, they may not always find them accessible due to stock-outs and difficulties with returning to the clinic for reinjections. FHI 360 is spearheading efforts to develop a longer-acting injectable (LAI) contraceptive that could provide at least 6 months of protection against pregnancy. This article addresses systems-level considerations for the introduction of a new LAI.

methodsWe conducted qualitative case studies in Kenya and Rwanda-two countries that have high levels of injectable use but with different service delivery contexts. Between June and September 2012, we conducted in-depth interviews with 27 service providers and 19 policy makers and program implementers focusing on 4 themes: systems-level barriers and facilitators to delivering LAI services; process for introducing an LAI; LAI distribution approaches; and potential LAI characteristics. We also obtained electronic feedback from 28 international family planning opinion leaders.

resultsRespondents indicated strong interest in an LAI and thought it would appeal to existing injectable users as well as new family planning clients, both for spacing and for limiting births. Providers appreciated the potential for a lighter workload due to fewer follow-up visits, but they were concerned that fewer visits would also decrease their ability to help women manage side effects. The providers also appreciated the 1-month grace period for follow-up LAI injections; some seemed unaware of the latest international guidance that had increased the grace period from 2 weeks to 4 weeks for the currently available 3-month injectable. The majority of policy makers and program implementers were supportive of letting community health workers provide the method, but many nurses and midwives in Kenya had reservations about the approach. At the policy level, respondents indicated that obtaining regulatory approvals before introducing the new method could be costly and time-consuming. Manufacturing and procurement decisions could also affect cost and availability.

conclusionsSuccessful introduction of a potential longer-acting injectable may be enhanced by considering broader systemic issues, including managing cost to the health system and users, expanding access through community-based distribution, and training providers on the latest service delivery guidelines.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelAdultContraceptionContraceptive Agents, FemaleFamily Planning ServicesFemaleHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHealth Services AccessibilityHumansKenyaMiddle AgedQualitative ResearchRwandaSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung AdultContraceptive Agents, Female

Identifiers

PMID25611479
PMCPMC4307861
OpenAlexW2143996717

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.