Open AccessPostpartum family planning in Rwanda: a cost effectiveness analysis
Author(s) -
Pamela R. D. Williams,
Katie Morales,
Vikram Sridharan,
Alekya Tummala,
Elliot Marseille
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
gates open research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.069
H-Index - 9
ISSN - 2572-4754
DOI - 10.12688/gatesopenres.12934.1
Subject(s) - family planning , pill , medicine , obstetrics , pregnancy , population , environmental health , nursing , research methodology , biology , genetics
Background: Globally, there is a large unmet need for family planning in the postpartum period: 90% of women in this group want family planning for birth spacing or to avoid unintended pregnancies and stop child bearing once desired family size has been reached. Women spend on average about 30 years, or three-quarters of their reproductive lives, attempting to avoid pregnancy. In total 76% of Rwandan women want family planning postpartum, yet a 26% unmet need remains. Methods: This cost effectiveness analysis compared the two most frequently-used family planning methods in Rwanda, longer-acting reversible contraception (LARC), injections and subdermal implants, and shorter-acting reversible contraceptives (non-LARC), pills and condoms. Women who do not use contraception postpartum were also represented. A time horizon of 24 months was used to reflect the World Health Organization suggested two-year spacing from birth until the next pregnancy, and the analysis was conducted from a health systems perspective. Results: For women of reproductive age (12-49 years) in Rwanda, including LARC postpartum family planning methods in the options, saves $18.73 per pregnancy averted, compared to family planning options that offer non-LARC methods exclusively. Conclusion: $2.8 million US$ per year can be saved if LARC is included as a contraceptive choice across all health centers in Rwanda; this cost savings provides the opportunity for these funds to be allocated to other high value interventions. Potential inclusion of these methods at Rwanda’s faith-based health facilities warrants further attention.