Table 4.
Questions assessing participating clinicians’ practices relating to contraception and IUDs
| Question (Frequency) | All N = 434 |
China N = 115 |
Kazakhstan N = 108 |
Laos N = 105 |
Mexico N = 106 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| a) Over the past 12 months, before providing intrauterine devices (IUDs), how often did you perform a pelvic/genital examination? [Recommended practice] | 80.4 % (349/434) |
88.7 % (102/115) |
92.6 % (100/108) |
67.6 % (71/105) |
71.7 % (76/106) |
| b) Over the past 12 months, before providing combined oral contraceptives (COCs), how often did you perform a pelvic/genital examination? [Contrary to recommended practice] | 4.64 % (20/431) |
3.48 % (4/115) |
0 % (0/106) |
6.7 % (7/104) |
8.49 % (9/106) |
| c) Over the past 12 months, when providing intrauterine devices (IUDs), how often did you recommend a follow-up visit after the first menses or 3–6 weeks following insertion? [Recommended practice] | 83.2 % (356/428) |
85.2 % (98/115) |
89.3 % (92/103) |
68.3 % (71/104) |
89.6 % (95/106) |
| d) Over the past 12 months, when providing combined oral contraceptives (COCs), how often did you recommend a follow-up visit? [Recommended practice] | 76.2 % (330/433) |
70.4 % (81/115) |
75.9 % (82/108) |
66.3 % (69/104) |
92.5 % (98/106) |
| e) Over the past 12 months, before providing combined oral contraceptives (COCs), how often did you screen for high blood pressure? [Recommended practice] | 67.0 % (288/430) |
44.7 % (51/114) |
66.0 % (70/106) |
67.3 % (70/104) |
91.5 % (97/106) |
| All recommended practices | 0.9 % (4/436) |
0.9 % (1/115) |
0.9 % (1/110) |
0 % (0/105) |
1.9 % (2/106) |
Data show the percentage and fraction of respondents who over the previous 12 months engaged in the recommended practices described in the questions a,c,d,e either often or very often (vs. never, rarely, sometimes, and not applicable) and who never engaged in the non-recommended practice as described in the question b (vs. rarely, sometimes, often, very often, and not applicable)
Note that because of variations among sampling frames and a limited sample size, these results cannot, and should not, be compared across countries