RNSurveyCurationis2018

Female condom acceptability and use amongst young women in Botswana.

Moitlamo Mokgetse, Mokholelana M Ramukumba

PMID 30326709

WHAT IT FOUND

Young women in Jwaneng clinics almost all had heard of the female condom, but only 4.21% used it.

They strongly agreed insertion felt like a hassle and the condom looked odd, and 96.84% said it was too big or long.

Key findings

01Only 4.21% of the 95 women surveyed reported using the female condom as their method of contraception.

02All respondents had heard of the female condom, and 90.53% reported that they had seen it.

03Women strongly agreed that insertion seemed to be a hassle and the female condom looked odd (mean = 5), and 96.84% said the device was too big and too long.

STILL TO COME

How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for RNs

Read the rest of this summary

You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.

Already have one?

What it does not show

The study surveyed women who were already using family planning services and had been exposed to female condom health promotion, so it may not represent young women who do not attend clinics. Data were self-reported in a questionnaire, and the final sample was reduced from 136 calculated to 95 after incomplete responses were removed. The study did not test whether a change in education, product features, or promotion would increase female condom use. The paper does not establish why female condom distribution was low, and it does not state who initiated male condom use. The paper states there were no significant associations, but it also describes the chi-square test decision inconsistently.

The easy way to misread this

Do not conclude that female condoms are ineffective or that health promotion has failed. This was a descriptive survey of women already using family planning services, and it did not test whether a change in education, product features, or promotion would increase use.

Read it on PubMed →