Determinants of Preference of Source of Injectable Contraceptives among Rural Women in Uganda: A Case Study of Depo-Provera

Olivia Nakayiza, Robert Wamala, Betty Kwagala


Understanding preference of source of contraceptive commodities is essential in enhancing the delivery of family planning services. This paper identifies the determinants of preferred source of Depo-Provera among rural women in Uganda. The analysis is based on data sourced from a Save the Children and Family Health International study involving 642 women who were introduced to the contraceptive three years prior to the evaluation. Data were analyzed at univariate, bivariate and multivariate levels. Private sources were the most preferred of Depo-Provera as compared to public sources. Preference for private sources was more likely among older women (p < 0.05), those who had never experienced stock-outs of Depo-Provera (p < 0.01), and those who had obtained their last injectable from private sources (p < 0.01). These findings support the strategy of communitybased distribution of contraceptives in enhancing access and utilization of family planning services in Uganda. (Afr J Reprod Health 2014; 18[3]: 48-56)


Keywords: Uganda; Source of contraceptives, rural environment 



Comprendre la préférence de la source des produits contraceptifs est essentiel pour l'amélioration de la prestation des services de la planification familiale. Ce document identifie les déterminants de la source préférée de Depo-Provera chez les femmes rurales en Ouganda. L'analyse est basée sur des données provenant des études réalisées par  Save the Children et Family Health International impliquant 642 femmes qui ont été introduites pour les trois ans de contraception avant l'évaluation. Les données ont été analysées aux niveaux univariée, bivariée et multivariée. Les sources privées ont été préférées (de 69,6%) à des sources publiques  pour la procuration de Depo-Provera. La préférence des sources privées était plus probable chez les femmes plus âgées (p <0,05), celles-là  qui n'ont jamais connu des ruptures de stock de Depo-Provera (p <0,01), ont été introduites à Depo-Provera par des sources privées (p <0,01) et avaient obtenu leur dernière injection de sources privées (p <0,01). Ces résultats confirment la stratégie de distribution à base communautaire des contraceptifs dans l'amélioration de l'accès et l'utilisation des services de planification familiale. (Afr J Reprod Health 2014; 18[3]: 48-56)


Mots-clés: Ouganda; Source des contraceptifs, environnement rural  

Full Text:



CDC. Ten Great Public Health Achievements. Centre for Disease Control (CDC), 1999. Retrieved from


Singh S, Darroch J, Ashford L and Vlassoff M. Adding it up: The costs and benefits of investing in family planning and maternal and newborn health. New York: Guttmacher Institute and United Nations Population Fund, 2009. Retrieved from http://www.

WHO. Medical Eligibility Criteria for Contraceptive Use.

Geneva: World Health Organization (WHO)

Press, 2004.

Oyedokun, A. O. Determinants of contraceptive usage: lessons from women in Osun state, Nigeria. Journal of Humanities and Social Science 2007; 1 (2): 1-14.

Guttmacher Institute. Adding it Up. 2009. Retrieved from

Leisinger KM, Schmitt K and Pandya-Lorch R. Six billion and counting: Population and food security in the 21st century. Food Policy Statements, International Food Policy Research Institute, Washington D.C., USA, 2000.

USAID. Achieving the MDGs: The contribution of family planning: Uganda. U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). Health Policy Initiative Washington, District of Columbia, USA: Constella Futures, 2009.

World Bank. World Development Indicators. Washington, DC: World Bank, 2009.

Sharan M, Ahmed S, May J and Soucat A. Family Planning Trends in Sub-Saharan Africa: Progress, Prospects, and Lessons Learned, 2010). Retrieved from AFRICAE- XT/Resources/258643-1271798012256/familyplanning-25.pdf

UBOS and Macro International. Uganda Demographic and Health Survey 2005/06. Uganda Bureau of Statistics (UBOS), Kampala, Uganda, 2006.

Bhandari GP, Premarajan KC, Jha N, Yadav BK, Paudel IS and Nagesh S. Prevalence and determinants of unmet need for family planning in a district of eastern region of Nepal; Kathmandu University Medical Journal, 2006; 4(2): 203-210.

Lutalo T, Kidugavu M, Wawer MJ, Serwadda, D, Zabin LS and Gray RH. Trends and determinants of contraceptive use in Rakai District, Uganda, 1995-98. Studies in Family Planning 2000; 31(3):217-227.

Al Riyami A. Afifi M and Mabry RM. Women's autonomy, education and employment in Oman and their influence on contraceptive use. Reproductive Health Matters, 2004; 12(23):144-154.

Henshaw SK, Singh S, Oye-Adeniran BA, Adewole IF, Iwere N and Cuca YP. The incidence of induced abortion in Nigeria. Int Fam Perspec 1998; 24: 156– 164.

Okonofua FE, Odimegwu C, Ajabor H, Daru PH and Johnson A. Assessing the prevalence and determinants of unwanted pregnancy and induced abortion in Nigeria. Stud Fam Plann 1999; 30: 67–77. 16. Nalwadda G, Mirembe F, Byamugisha, J and Faxelid E. Persistent high fertility in Uganda: young people recount obstacles and enabling factors to use of contraceptives. BMC public health 2010; 10, 530. doi:10.1186/1471-2458-10-530

Stanback J, Mbonye AK and Bekiita M. Contraceptive injections by community health workers in Uganda: a nonrandomized community trial. Bull World Health Organ. 2007; 85(10):768-73.

Malarchera S, Meirik O, Lebetkinc E, Shahd I, Spielera J and Stanback J. Provision of DMPA by community health workers: what the evidence shows.

Contraception 2010; 83 (6):495–503.

Landry DJ, Wei J and Frost JJ. Public and private providers' involvement in improving their patients' contraceptive use. Contraception 2008; 78 (1): 42–51

Stanback J, Spieler J, Shah I and Finger, WR. Community-based health workers can safely and effectively administer injectable contraceptives: conclusions from a technical consultation. Contraception 2010; 81(3):181–84.

Hyttel M, Rasanathan JJ, Tellier M and Taremwad W. Use of Injectable hormonal contraceptives: diverging perspectives of women and men, service providers and policymakers in Uganda. Reproductive Health Matters 2012; 20(40): 148–157

Anderson RM. Revisiting the behavioural model and access to medical care: does it matter? J Health Soc Behav 1995; 36 (1): 1–10.

Goddard M and Smith P. Equity of access to health care services: Theory and evidence from the UK. Social Science & Medicine 2001; 53(9): 1149–1162. doi:10.1016/S0277-9536(00)00415-9

Hilbe JM. Logistic Regression Models. Chapman & Hall/CRC; 2009.

UBOS and ICF International. Uganda Demographic and Health Survey 2010/11. Uganda Bureau of Statistics (UBOS), Kampala, 2011.

Ladipo OA. Where Do People in Nigeria Get Their Contraception? PLoS Med 2005; 2(11): e366. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0020366

Biddlecom AE, Munthali A, Singh S and Woog V. Adolescents’ views of and preferences for sexual and reproductive health services in Burkina Faso, Ghana, Malawi and Uganda. African journal of reproductive health 2007; 11(3): 99.

Chaya N, Kali-Ashet A, and Fox M. Condoms count: Meeting the need in the era of HIV/AIDS. The PAI Report Card 2002. Washington (DC): Population

Action International, 2002, 44 p. 5.

Arowojolu AO, Okewole IA and Adekunle AO. Comparative evaluation of the effectiveness and safety of two regimens of levonorgestrel for emergency contraception in Nigerians. Contraception 2002; 66: 269– 273

Olukoya AA. Pregnancy termination: Result of a community based study in Lagos. Int J Gynaecol Obstet


  • There are currently no refbacks.