Abstract
Background: Spatial access has a direct effect on health service utilization in many settings. Distance to health facility has proven to affect family planning (FP) service use in many Sub-Saharan countries. Studies show that women who reside closer to facilities offering family planning services are more likely to use modern contraceptives. However, researchers often test the theory of distance decay. This study analyzed the significance of proximity to family planning services, service availability, and quality of family planning services on modern contraceptive use in Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo. Methods: We used a pool of four rounds of facility- and population-based survey data in Kinshasa from PMA2020 between 2014 and 2016. We used GPS coordinates to calculate the distance between the health facilities and households. We tested if women who live closer to service delivery points with higher level of availability and quality are more likely to use modern contraceptives or less likely to have unmet need for contraceptive services. Results: 10,968 women were interviewed over four rounds of data collection. Our findings show that living closer to an SDP is not a determinant of modern contraceptive use or having unmet need for FP services. Lack of cognitive access, economic barriers, bypassing the closest facility, and sociocultural norms are strong barriers for women in Kinshasa to use modern contraceptives. Proximity to quality services did not necessarily result in increased FP use among women of reproductive age living in Kinshasa, thus suggesting that a bypass phenomenon may occur when obtaining modern contraceptive services. Conclusions: This study notes that barriers other than proximity to access may be substantial determinants of contraceptive use or unmet need. More research should be conducted that directly measures multidimensional components of access in order to interpret women’s contraceptive seeking behaviors in urban areas of Sub-Saharan Africa.
Funder
Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
Subject
Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health,Health Policy,Immunology and Microbiology (miscellaneous),Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology (miscellaneous),Medicine (miscellaneous)
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献