Table 2.
Characteristics of women using DMPA-IM, Implants, and Male Condom compared with DMPA-SC, in Burkina Faso.
| DMPA-IM |
Implants |
Male condom |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| aRRR | 95% CI | aRRR | 95% CI | aRRR | 95% CI | |
| Age category | ||||||
| 15–19 (reference) | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | |||
| 20–24 | 0.66 | 0.28, 1.52 | 0.84 | 0.41, 1.75 | 0.76 | 0.35, 1.66 |
| 25–29 | 0.79 | 0.30, 2.06 | 0.74 | 0.33, 1.65 | 0.55 | 0.22, 1.39 |
| 30–34 | 0.93 | 0.35, 2.49 | 0.98 | 0.40, 2.40 | 0.63 | 0.23, 1.74 |
| 35–39 | 0.67 | 0.23, 1.90 | 0.74 | 0.32, 1.75 | 0.70 | 0.24, 2.03 |
| 40–44 | 0.58 | 0.17, 1.99 | 1.14 | 0.38, 3.47 | 0.45 | 0.14, 1.47 |
| 45–49 | 0.53 | 0.11, 2.63 | 1.39 | 0.31, 6.28 | 0.85 | 0.16, 4.45 |
| Number of children | ||||||
| 0–1 (reference) | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | |||
| 2–5 | 0.65 | 0.38, 1.11 | 0.73 | 0.44, 1.20 | 1.10 | 0.59, 2.04 |
| 6 + | 0.71 | 0.35, 1.46 | 1.20 | 0.60, 2.40 | 4.78 | 2.22, 10.25 |
| Fertility preferences | ||||||
| More children (reference) | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | |||
| No more children | 1.65 | 0.88, 3.12 | 1.12 | 0.69, 1.83 | 1.05 | 0.52, 2.14 |
| Don't know/infertile | 7.09 | 0.74, 67.49 | 1.36 | 0.16, 11.9 | 0.70 | 0.06, 8.86 |
| Education | ||||||
| None (reference) | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | |||
| Primary | 0.82 | 0.47, 1.43 | 0.82 | 0.51, 1.33 | 1.22 | 0.67, 2.24 |
| Secondary | 0.73 | 0.41, 1.30 | 0.86 | 0.50, 1.47 | 2.13 | 1.05, 4.33 |
| Tertiary or higher | 0.32 | 0.07, 1.40 | 0.77 | 0.27, 2.20 | 4.42 | 1.37, 14.29 |
| Marital Status | ||||||
| Married (reference) | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | |||
| Divorced/widowed | 0.77 | 0.25, 2.41 | 1.59 | 0.72, 3.50 | 3.04 | 1.12, 8.21 |
| Never-married | 1.39 | 0.58, 3.34 | 1.41 | 0.69, 2.87 | 10.68 | 4.54, 25.12 |
| Wealth quintile | ||||||
| 1 (lowest, reference) | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | |||
| 2 | 1.10 | 0.67, 1.81 | 0.93 | 0.55, 1.57 | 0.89 | 0.32, 2.51 |
| 3 | 1.29 | 0.61, 2.74 | 1.27 | 0.65, 2.47 | 1.43 | 0.50, 4.13 |
| 4 | 0.59 | 0.29, 1.20 | 0.70 | 0.37, 1.32 | 1.47 | 0.53, 4.06 |
| 5 (highest) | 0.73 | 0.28, 1.90 | 0.74 | 0.32, 1.70 | 3.40 | 0.98, 11.75 |
| Heard FP on radio | 0.80 | 0.49, 1.32 | 1.02 | 0.69, 1.50 | 0.91 | 0.51, 1.64 |
| Saw FP on TV | 0.78 | 0.40, 1.51 | 0.71 | 0.47, 1.09 | 0.86 | 0.45, 1.63 |
| Saw FP in magazine | 0.98 | 0.52, 1.84 | 1.03 | 0.51, 2.10 | 1.00 | 0.50, 2,00 |
| Number of FP methods known | 1.17 | 1.06, 1.30 | 1.03 | 0.94, 1.14 | 1.24 | 1.09, 1.41 |
| Urban residence | 1.52 | 0.75, 3.07 | 1.62 | 0.93, 2.82 | 2.47 | 1.05, 5.81 |
| N = | 2221 | |||||
Notes: Results above are from multinomial logistic regressions. Instances where the odds ratios in 95% CIs do not cross 1 are indicated in bold font; aRRR = adjusted relative risk ratios (adjusted); 95% CIs = 95% confidence intervals; the data source for this analysis was the Performance Monitoring for Action (PMA) Project, 2016–2019. We included all measures above as variables in these regression models.