DETERMINANTS OF UNMET NEED FOR FAMILY PLANNING IN SLUMS OF LUCKNOW

Mukesh Shukla, Monica Agarwal, Kriti Yadav

Journal of Evidence Based Medicine and Healthcare · 2015 · 10 citations · 3 references

DOIFull text

Open access

Concepts

Abstract

INTRODUCTION:
\nUnderstanding
\nof
\nfamily
\nplanning
\nscenario
\namong
\ndifferent
\nsocieties
\nand
\ncommunities,
\nwhich
\nby
\nand
\nlarge
\nreside
\nin
\nurban
\nslum
\nareas,
\nmight
\nprove
\nuseful
\nin
\nincreasing
\nfamily
\nplanning
\nacceptance
\nby
\nthem
\nand
\ndecreasing
\npopulation
\ngrowth.
\nUnmet
\nneed
\nis
\na
\nvaluable
\nindicator
\nfor
\nassessing
\nthe
\nachievements
\nof
\nnational
\nfamily
\nplanning
\nprograms.
\nOBJECTIVES:
\nThe
\npresent
\nstudy
\nwas
\nundertaken
\nwith
\nthe
\nobjectives
\nto
\nestimate
\nunmet
\nneed
\nfor
\nfamily
\nplanning
\namong
\nthe
\nmarried
\nwomen
\nof
\nreproductive
\nage
\ngroup
\n(15
\n-
\n49
\nyears)
\nin
\nurban
\nslums
\nof
\nLucknow
\nand
\nto
\ndetermine
\nthe
\nvarious
\nfactors
\nthat
\ninfluence
\nthe
\nunmet
\nneed.
\nMETHODS:
\nA
\ncommunity
\nbased
\ncross
\n-
\nsectional
\nstudy
\nwas
\nconducted
\nin
\nslums
\nof
\nLucknow
\nCity
\nfrom
\nFebruary
\n2014
\nto
\nSeptember
\n2014.
\nA
\ntotal
\n452
\nmarried
\nwomen
\nin
\nreproductive
\nage
\ngroup
\nwere
\ninterviewed
\nthrough
\nhouse
\nto
\nhouse
\nsurvey
\nwith
\nthe
\nhelp
\nof
\na
\npre
\n-
\ndesigned,
\npre
\n-
\ntested
\nand
\nsemi
\n-
\nstructured
\nquestionnaire.
\nRESULTS:
\nThe
\ntotal
\nunmet
\nneed
\nfor
\nfamily
\nplanning
\nwas
\n69.0%.
\nMultivariate
\nlogistic
\nregression
\nrevealed
\nsocioeconomic
\nstatus
\nupper
\nlower
\nand
\nbelow
\n(OR
\n2.7;
\n95%
\nCI
\n1.5
\n-
\n5.1;
\np
\n=
\n0.00);
\nduration
\nof
\nmarriage
\nless
\nthan
\n1
\nyear
\n(OR
\n1.8;
\n95%
\nCI
\n1.1
\n-
\n2.9;
\np
\n=
\n0.01);
\nless
\nnumber
\nof
\nlive
\nissues
\n(OR
\n1.6;
\n95%
\nCI
\n1.1
\n-
\n2.5;
\np
\n=
\n0.00);
\nworking
\nstatus
\nof
\nwomen
\n(OR
\n1.9;
\n95%
\nCI
\n1.1
\n-
\n2.9;
\np
\n=
\n0.03);
\nsocial
\nclass
\ni.e.
\nOBC
\nand
\nSC/ST
\n(OR
\n2.3;
\n95%
\nCI
\n1.1
\n-
\n4.6;
\np
\n=
\n0.02)
\nwere
\nfound
\nto
\nbe
\nindependent
\npredictors
\nof
\nunmet
\nneed
\nof
\nfamily
\nplanning.
\nCONCLUSION:
\nThe
\npresent
\nstudy
\nrevealed
\nthat
\nunmet
\nneed
\nfor
\nfamily
\nplanning
\nwas
\nquite
\nhigh
\namong
\nwomen
\nbelonging
\nto
\nsocial
\nclass
\ni.e.
\nOBC
\nand
\nSC/ST,
\nwith
\nlow
\nsocioeconomic
\nstatus,
\nduration
\nof
\nmarriage
\nless
\nthan
\none
\nyear
\nless
\nnumber
\nof
\nlive
\nissues
\nand
\nworking
\nstatus
\nof
\nthe
\nwomen.

References

3