Evaluating the Impact of Family Planning Programmes

1996 ◽  
pp. 299-335
Author(s):  
Dennis A. Ahlburg ◽  
Ian Diamond
Keyword(s):  
Family Planning ◽  
The Impact

scholarly journals 1535. Impact of Defunding Family Planning Health Centers on Gonorrhea and Chlamydia Cases in Iowa: A Spatiotemporal Analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S768-S768
Author(s):  
Megan L Srinivas ◽  
Eileen Yang ◽  
Weiming Tang ◽  
Joseph Tucker
Keyword(s):  
Family Planning ◽  
Low Income ◽  
Rural Areas ◽  
Spatiotemporal Analysis ◽  
Incidence Rates ◽  
Health Centers ◽  
Transmitted Infection ◽  
Missed Opportunities ◽  
Linear Regression Modeling ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background Fifteen states have defunded family planning health centers (FPHCs), causing thousands to be left without health services. This has accelerated in the COVID-19 era. FPHCs provide low-income individuals in rural areas with essential primary care services, including sexually transmitted infection prevention, testing, and treatment. The purpose of this analysis is to use spatiotemporal methods to examine the impact of FPHC closures in Iowa on the reported number of gonorrhea and chlamydia cases at the county level. Methods This analysis investigates the association between FPHC closures and changes in the number of gonorrhea and chlamydia cases between 2016 and 2018. Iowa implemented defunding policies for family planning clinics, resulting in four FPHC closures in June 2017. 2016 pre-closure STI incidence rates were compared to 2018 post-closure rates. Gonorrhea and chlamydia rates in the four Iowa counties with clinic closures were compared to the 95 Iowa counties without closures. T tests were used to compare changes in reported gonorrhea and chlamydia rates in the two settings. Linear regression modeling was used to determine the relationship between clinic closures and changes in gonorrhea and chlamydia cases. Results The gonorrhea burden in Iowa increased from 83 cases per 100,000 people in 2016 to 153.8 cases per 100,000 people in 2018. The four counties with clinic closures experienced a significantly larger increase (absolute 217 cases per 100,000 population) in their gonorrhea rate compared to counties without FPHC closures (absolute 121 cases per 100,000 population). There was also a significant relationship between clinic closures and increasing gonorrhea rates (p = 0.0015). Over the three-year period, there was no change in chlamydia rates (p = 0.1182). However, there was a trend towards counties with more FPHC closures having a higher number of chlamydia cases (p = 0.057). Conclusion Despite the fact that many STI diagnoses are made and reported by FPHCs, our data suggest that clinic closures may have contributed to an increase in gonorrhea and chlamydia cases. This is consistent with delayed diagnoses and missed opportunities for providing essential STI services to vulnerable and under-served rural residents. Legislative action is urgently needed to curtail this trend. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

Family planning and fertility decline in rural Iran: the impact of rural health clinics

2010 ◽  
Vol 19 (S1) ◽  
pp. 159-180 ◽  
Author(s):  
Djavad Salehi-Isfahani ◽  
M. Jalal Abbasi-Shavazi ◽  
Meimanat Hosseini-Chavoshi
Keyword(s):  
Family Planning ◽  
Rural Health ◽  
Fertility Decline ◽  
Health Clinics ◽  
Rural Health Clinics ◽  
The Impact

Family Planning Decisions after the Birth of a Cystic Fibrosis Child: The Impact of Prenatal Diagnosis

1988 ◽  
Vol 23 (sup143) ◽  
pp. 38-46 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. Evers-Kiebooms ◽  
L. Denayer ◽  
J.-J. Cassiman ◽  
H. Van Den Berghe
Keyword(s):  
Cystic Fibrosis ◽  
Prenatal Diagnosis ◽  
Family Planning ◽  
Planning Decisions ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Cystic Fibrosis Child

The impact of family planning on womenʼs health

1993 ◽  
Vol 5 (6) ◽  
pp. 793-797 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carolyn Westhoff ◽  
Allan Rosenfield
Keyword(s):  
Family Planning ◽  
The Impact

scholarly journals A mixed-methods evaluation of the impact of a person-centered family planning intervention for community health workers on family planning outcomes in India

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Nadia Diamond-Smith ◽  
Claire McDonell ◽  
Ananta Basudev Sahu ◽  
Kali Prasad Roy ◽  
Katie Giessler
Keyword(s):  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Family Planning ◽  
Community Health ◽  
San Francisco ◽  
Health Workers ◽  
Qualitative Interviews ◽  
Centered Care ◽  
The University ◽  
Care Worker ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background Person-centered quality for family planning has been gaining increased attention, yet few interventions have focused on this, or measured associations between person-centered quality for family planning and family planning outcomes (uptake, continuation, etc.). In India, the first point of contact for family planning is often the community health care worker, in this case, Accredited Social Health Activists (ASHAs). Methods In this study, we evaluate a training on person-centered family planning as an add-on to a training on family planning provision for urban ASHAs in Varanasi, India in 2019 using mixed methods. We first validate a scale to measure person-centered family planning in a community health worker population and find it to be valid. Higher person-centered family planning scores are associated with family planning uptake. Results Comparing women who saw intervention compared to control ASHAs, we find that the intervention had no impact on overall person-centered family planning scores. Women in the intervention arm were more likely to report that their ASHA had a strong preference about what method they choose, suggesting that the training increased provider pressure. However, qualitative interviews with ASHAs suggest that they value person-centered care for their interactions and absorbed the messages from the intervention. Conclusions More research is needed on how to intervene to change behaviors related to person-centered family planning. Trial registration This study received IRB approval from the University of California, San Francisco (IRB # 15–25,950) and was retrospectively registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04206527).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document