Abstract
Five hundred and eighteen Norplant acceptors (260 ever-users and 258 current users) were interviewed to assess their perceptions about Norplant. The mean age of the acceptors was 32.6±5.7 years (mean±SD). The mean parity was 4.3 and many of the users (40.2%) were illiterate.
The most common reason to choose Norplant was its long duration of action (70.1%) followed by doctor's advice (10.4%) and use by other women (10.1%). Norplant was recommended by family planning workers in 35.3% cases, doctors in 29.2% cases and friends in 17.4% cases. Advertisement did not play any role in the women's choice of Norplant.
In 77.3% cases, the decision to use Norplant was a joint decision. Only 15% of the users had fears/anxieties before insertion. Most of these women (44%) were concerned about possible ill-effects of Norplant on their health rather than efficacy. The social acceptance of Norplant was very high (76%) and more than half of the users (52.5%) were satisfied with the method.
Among current users, 83.9% wanted to continue Norplant for 5 years. Only 39 users (15.1%) intended to discontinue. The main reason for discontinuation was menstrual disturbance (69.2%), followed by weight gain (12.7%).
The study suggests that long duration of effective action and high social acceptance are likely to make Norplant a popular method among Pakistani women.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
WHO. Programme for Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction Biennial Report 1994-95. Geneva: World Health Organization. 1996.
Bruce J. Fundamental elements of the quality of care: a simple framework. New York: Population Council. 1990:1-90.
Jain AK. Managing quality of care in Population Programme. West Hartford: Kumanain Press. 1992.
Musham C, Darr EG, Strossner ML. A qualitative study of the perceptions of dissatisfied NORPLANT users. J Fam Pract. 1995;40:465-70.
Opara JU, Ernst FA, Gaskin H, Smith L, Navels HY. Factors associated with elective NORPLANT removal in black and white women. J Natl Med Assoc. 1997;89:37-40.
Eilers GM, Savanson TK. Women's satisfaction with NORPLANT as compared with oral contraception. J Fam Pract. 1994;38:596-600.
Haugen MM, Evans CB, Kim MH. Patient satisfaction with a levonorgestrel-releasing contraceptive implant. Reasons for and patterns of removal. J Reprod Med. 1996;41:849-54.
Shivo S, Ollila E, Hemononki E. Who uses NORPLANT. A study from Finland. Acta Obstet Gynaecol Scand. 1995;75:476-81.
Vekemans M, Delvigne A, Paesmans M. Continuity of utilization of levonorgestrel releasing contraceptive implants: prospective study in Belgium. Rev Med Brux. 1996;17:375-81.
Del Carmen Cravioto M, Alvarado G, Canto-de-Cetina T et al. A multicenter comparative study on the efficacy, safety and acceptability of the contraceptive subdermal implants Norplant and Norplant-II. Contraception. 1997;55:359-67.
Hardy E, Goodson P, De Souza TR, Rodriguez CM. Factors associated with the acceptance of Norplant or IUD among women with similar socio-demographic characteristics. Adv Contracept. 1991;7:95-105.
Hassan EO, Kafafi L, El Hussaini M, Hardee-Cleveland K, Pater L. The acceptability of NORPLANT in Egypt. Adv Contracept. 1992;8:331-48.
Noerpramana NP. A cohort study of NORPLANT: side effects and acceptance. Adv Contracept. 1995;11:97-114.
Chetri M, Bhatta A, Amatya RN et al. Five-year evaluation of safety, efficacy and acceptability of NORPLANT implants in Nepal. Adv Contracept. 1996;12:187-99.
Akhter H, Dunson TR, Amatya RN et al. A five-year clinical evaluation of Norplant contraceptive subdermal implants in Bangladeshi acceptors. Contraception. 1993;47:569-82.
Shamim N, Rehan N, Inayatullah A. Use of NORPLANT in Pakistan: Two years' experience. JPMA. 1994;44:3-7.
Sivin I, Mishell DR Jr, Darney P, Wan L, Christ M. Levonorgestrel capsule implants in the United States: a 5-year study. Obstet Gynecol. 1998;92:337-44.
Shaaban MM. Experience with NORPLANT in Egypt. Ann Med. 1993;25:167-9.
Rummesijo JK, Achwal I, Rumisijo IN. Acceptability of NORPLANT contraceptive subdermal implants in Kenya. East Afr Med J. 1994;71:558-61
Frank ML, Poindexter AN, Johnson ML, Batrman L. Characteristics and attitudes of early contraceptive implant acceptance in Texas. Fam Plann Perspect. 1992;24:208-13.
Petitti DB. Issues in evaluating Norplant. In: Samuels SE, Smith MD, eds. Norplant and Poor Women. Menlo Park: The Henry J Kaiser Family Foundation. 1992:65-72.
WHO. Contraceptive Method Mix: Guidelines for Policy and Service Delivery. Geneva: World Health Organization. 1994.
Noerpramana NP. Factors influencing attitudes about NORPLANT contraceptive sub-dermal implant. Adv Contracept. 1995;11:97-114.
Basnayake S, Thapa S, Balogh SA. Evaluation of safety, efficacy and acceptability of NORPLANT implants in Sri Lanka. Stud Fam Plann. 1988;19:39-47.
Singh K, Viegas OA, Fong YF, Ratnom SS. Acceptability of Norplant implants for fertility regulation in Singapore. Contraception. 1992;45:39-47.
WHO. Users preferences for contraceptive methods in India, Korea, the Philippines and Turkey. Stud Fam Plann. 1980;17:126-35.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Rehan, N., Inayatullah, A. & Chaudhary, I. Norplant: users' perspective in Pakistan. Advances in Contraception 15, 95–107 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006741508176
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006741508176