Table 4.
Regression Model of Contraceptive Method Choice Among Serodiscordant and Concordant Positive Couples (n=957)
| Injection vs. oral contraceptive pill | IUD, Norplant, and tubal ligation vs. oral contraceptive pill | |
|---|---|---|
| Study arm (control)b | ||
| Motivational | 1.02 (0.68-1.52)a | 1.34 (0.81-2.21) |
| Methods | 1.55 (1.03-2.34) | 1.20 (0.70-2.05) |
| Motivational and Methods | 1.65 (1.07-2.55) | 2.00 (1.17-3.44) |
| Woman is HIV positive (male or both are HIV positive) | 1.31 (0.76-2.26) | 1.23 (0.57-2.63) |
| Couple is serodiscordant (concordant positive) | 1.44 (0.95-2.17) | 0.89 (0.50-1.58) |
| Number of living children (1–2) | ||
| 3–5 | 1.65 (1.20-2.26) | 1.87 (1.24-2.83) |
| >6 | 2.51 (1.45-4.34) | 3.36 (1.77-6.37) |
| Household income is above median for cohort | 1.16 (0.86-1.56) | 0.96 (0.66-1.40) |
| Female understands English easily | 1.23 (0.88-1.77) | 1.02 (0.67-1.55) |
| Male understands English easily | 1.53 (1.02-2.29) | 1.01 (0.96-1.02) |
| Number of years female has lived in Lusaka | 1.01 (0.98-1.02) | 1.01 (0.98-1.03) |
| Male reports current alcohol use | 1.18 (0.87-1.61) | 0.94 (0.64-1.37) |
| Male wants to cease/limit childbearing | 1.15 (0.85-1.56) | 1.93 (1.29-2.86) |
| Female has health concerns about oral contraceptive pills | 1.99 (1.42-2.80) | 2.41 (1.60-3.62) |
Numbers shown are relative risk ratios and 95% confidence intervals.
a
Relative risk ratios (95% confidence intervals).
b
Reference categories are in parentheses.