English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background: Since 2007, Satara district is implementing a pilot project named Second Honeymoon Package (SHP). SHP gives cash incentives to encourage postponement of first pregnancy in newly married couples. At the same time, contraception services are also provided under National family welfare program. There requires a significant amount of commitment and expenditure from the beneficiaries to avail the benefits of governmental programs, which is often overlooked by the system. The costs of these two reproductive health interventions are compared in this study. Objective: To calculate the cost of providing and utilizing contraception services for the newly-wed couples in Satara district from the perspective of the Government of Maharashtra and that of beneficiaries'. Materials and Methods: This was a cost-minimization study of two reproductive health interventions in rural part of Satara district. Information about expenditure incurred was calculated from 17th June 2010 to 16th June 2012. Cost analysis was conducted from the perspective of Government of Maharashtra and that of beneficiaries'. Costs of SHP were evaluated in comparison with those of routine family welfare program. Results: One thousand and ninety-five out of 1355 participants (80.8%) have used condoms, 125 participants (9.22%) have used oral pills while only 15 (1.1%) have used safe period method. The average distance of health facility from the homes of participants has been 4.24 km ± 6.54. Annual unit cost of implementation of SHP was Rs. 883 (16.35$/ year) during the study period while the opportunity cost of utilizing the contraception services was Rs. 383.40 (7.1$) per person per year. The annual unit cost of implementation of family planning program was Rs. 323.73 (6$). Conclusions: In districts like Satara that have a strong family planning infrastructure, reorienting the program to provide contraception services for newly married couples may be achieved with minimal additional inputs.

Unit cost of providing and utilizing contraception services for newly married couples in Satara district of Maharashtra, India