Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31349786›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2019

Perspectives on contraceptive implant use in women living with HIV in Cape Town, South Africa: a qualitative study among primary healthcare providers and stakeholders.

Anna Brown, Jane Harries, Diane Cooper, Chelsea Morroni

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Early removal of etonogestrel subcutaneous contraceptive implant at a community health centre in Pretoria.South African family practice : official journal of the South African Academy of Family Practice/Primary Care · 2022
    Article
  5. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Anna BrownSchool of Public Health and Family Medicine, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa. annajhbrown@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6166-1302
Jane HarriesWomen's Health Research Unit, School of Public Health and Family Medicine, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.
Diane CooperWomen's Health Research Unit, School of Public Health and Family Medicine, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.
Chelsea MorroniWomen's Health Research Unit, School of Public Health and Family Medicine, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa.
University of Cape Town · ZA

Funding

Joint Cape Higher Education Consortium- Western Cape Government Grant (ZA) Awarded to the School of Public Health at University of the Western Cape and the School of Public Health and Family Medicine at University of Cape Town
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis study explored primary healthcare provider and HIV/contraception expert stakeholder perspectives on South Africa's public sector provision of contraceptive implants to women living with HIV. We investigated the contraceptive service-impact of official advice against provision of implants to women using the HIV antiretroviral drug, efavirenz, issued by the South African National Department of Health (NDoH) in 2014.

methodsQualitative data was collected in Cape Town in 2017 from primary healthcare contraceptive providers in four clinics that provide implants, as well as from other expert stakeholders selected for expertise in HIV and/or contraception. In-depth interviews and a group discussion explored South Africa's implant introduction and implant provision to women living with HIV. Data was analysed using an inductive thematic analysis approach.

resultsInterviews were conducted with 10 providers and 10 stakeholders. None of the four clinics where the providers worked currently offered the implant to women living with HIV. Stakeholders confirmed that this was consistent with patterns of implant provision at primary healthcare facilities across Cape Town. Factors contributing to providers' decisions to suspend provision of the implant to women living with HIV included: inadequate initial and ongoing provider training; interpretation of NDoH communications about implant use with efavirenz; provider unwillingness to risk harming clients and concerns about professional liability; and other pressures related to provider capacity.

conclusionsAll South African women, including those living with HIV, should have access to the full range of contraceptive options for which they are medically eligible. Changing guidance should be initiated and communicated in consultation with primary-level providers and service beneficiaries. Guidance issued to providers needs to be clear and fully evidence-informed, and its correct interpretation and implementation facilitated and monitored. Guidance should be accompanied by provider training, as well as counselling messages and tools to support providers. Generalized retraining of providers in rights-based, client-centred family planning, and in particular implant provision for women with HIV, is needed. These recommendations accord with the right of women living with HIV to access the highest possible standard of sexual and reproductive healthcare, including informed contraceptive choice and access to the contraceptive implant.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelContraceptive Agents, FemaleDrug ImplantsAlkynesBenzoxazinesCyclopropanesFemaleHIV InfectionsHumansMalePhysicians, Primary CareQualitative ResearchSouth AfricaStakeholder ParticipationAlkynesBenzoxazinesContraceptive Agents, FemaleCyclopropanesDrug ImplantsefavirenzAntiretroviral therapyContraceptive implantsHIVLARCsLong-acting reversible contraceptivesQualitativeSouth Africa

Identifiers

PMID31349786
PMCPMC6660962
OpenAlexW2963796488

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.