Search

Context: Improving contraceptive method choice is a goal of international family planning. Method mix-the percentage distribution of total contraceptive use across various methods-reflects both supply (availability of affordable methods) and demand (client preferences). We analyze changes in method mix, regional contrasts, and the relationship of the mix to contraceptive prevalence., Methods: We use 789 national surveys from the 1960s through 2019, from 113 developing countries with at least 1 million people and with data on use of 8 contraceptive methods. Two measures assess the "evenness" of the mix: method skew (more than 50% use is by 1 method), and the average deviation (AD) of the 8 methods' shares from their mean value. Population weighted and unweighted results are compared because they can differ substantially., Results: Use of traditional methods has declined but still represents 11% of all use (population weighted) or 17% (unweighted country average). Vasectomy's share was historically low with the exception of a few countries but is now even lower. The previous trend toward greater overall evenness in the mix has slowed recently. Sub-Saharan Africa shows a hormonal method progression from oral contraceptives to injectables to implants in a substantial number of countries. In some countries with high HIV prevalence, the condom share has increased. The leading method's share differs by region: female sterilization in Asia (39%) and in Latin America (31%), the pill in the Middle East/North Africa (32%), and the injectable in sub-Saharan Africa (36%). Method skew persists in 30% of countries. "Evenness" of mix is not related to contraceptive prevalence., Conclusion: The marked diversity in predominant methods underscores the conclusion that no single method mix is ideal or appropriate everywhere. But that diversity across countries, coupled with the persisting high degree of extreme skewness in many of them, argues for continued concerted efforts for programs to increase method choice., (© Bertrand et al.)

Reduced mortality has been the predominant cause of the marked global population growth over the last 3/4 of a century. While improved child survival increases motivation to reduce fertility, it comes too little and too late to forestall substantial population growth. And, beyond motivation, couples need effective means to control their fertility. It is an inconvenient truth that reducing child mortality contributes considerably to the population growth destined to compromise the quality of life of many, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa. Vigorous child survival programming is of course imperative. Wide access to voluntary family planning can help mitigate that growth and provide many other benefits.

Contraceptive prevalence has been central to family planning research over the past few decades, but researchers have given surprisingly little consideration to method mix, a proxy for method availability or choice. There is no 'ideal' method mix recognized by the international community; however, there may be reason for concern when one or two methods predominate in a given country. In this article method skew is operationally defined as a single method constituting 50% or more of contraceptive use in a given country. Of 96 countries examined in this analysis, 34 have this type of skewed method mix. These 34 countries cluster in three groups: (1) sixteen countries in which traditional methods dominate, most of which are in sub-Saharan Africa; (2) four countries in which female sterilization predominates (India, Brazil, Dominican Republic and Panama); and (3) fourteen countries that rely on a single reversible method (the pill in Algeria, Kuwait, Liberia, Morocco, Sudan and Zimbabwe; the IUD in Cuba, Egypt, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Republic, Moldova, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan; and the injectable in Malawi). A review of available literature on method choice in these countries provides substantial insight into the different patterns of method skew. Method skew in some countries reflects cultural preferences or social norms. Yet it becomes problematic if it stems from restrictive population policies, lack of access to a broad range of methods, or provider bias.