Feasibility testing of a community dialogue approach for promoting the uptake of family planning and contraceptive services in Zambia
Abstract Background: Community dialogues have been used in participatory approaches in various health prevention and awareness programs, including family planning interventions to increase understanding and alignment of particular issues from different peoples’ perspectives. The main aim of this paper is to document the feasibility testing of a community dialogue approach, which aimed to promote dialogue between healthcare providers and community members. The feasibility testing was part of formative-phase research needed to design an intervention, with the ultimate goal of increasing the uptake of family planning and contraception. The community dialogue intervention generated discussions on key approaches to improve family planning and contraception provision and uptake.Methods: Key stages of the community dialogue were undertaken, with representation from healthcare providers and community members. Participants included frontline and managerial health care providers, community health workers, family planning and contraception users, the youth, other stakeholders from the education sector, and civil society. How the dialogue was implemented (operational feasibility) as well as the cultural feasibility of the community dialogue content was evaluated through participant observations during the dialogue, using a standardised feasibility testing tick-list, and through focus group discussions with the stakeholders who participated in the community dialogue.Results: Overall, 21 of the 30 invited participants attended the meeting- 70 per cent attendance. The approach facilitated discussions on how quality care could be achieved in family planning and contraception provision, guided by the ground rules that were agreed upon by the different stakeholders. A need for more time for the discussion was noted. Also, more balanced representation from the adolescents, other stakeholders in family planning such as the community members was noted, especially in comparison to the healthcare providers. Some participants were not comfortable with the language used. And the young people felt older participants used complicated terminologies.Conclusion: Generally, the community dialogue was well received by the community members and the healthcare providers, as was observed from the sentiments expressed by both categories. Some key considerations for refining the approach included soliciting maximum participation from otherwise marginalized groups like the youth would provide stronger representation.