Your privacy, your choice

We use essential cookies to make sure the site can function. We also use optional cookies for advertising, personalisation of content, usage analysis, and social media.

By accepting optional cookies, you consent to the processing of your personal data - including transfers to third parties. Some third parties are outside of the European Economic Area, with varying standards of data protection.

See our privacy policy for more information on the use of your personal data.

for further information and to change your choices.
Skip to main content

Table 2 Comparison of current contraceptive use between endline and post-endline survey, according to MSS and GSM voucher programmes

From: Assessing the sustainability of two independent voucher-based family planning programs in Pakistan: a 24-months post-intervention evaluation

Characteristics

MSS – single purpose voucher

GSM – multipurpose voucher

Endline n = 390

Post-endline n = 338

p-value

Endline n = 409

Post-endline n = 324

p-value

n

%

n

%

n

%

n

%

Any method

354

90.8

197

58.3

 < 0.001

356

87.0

250

77.2

 < 0.001

Any modern method

352

90.3

175

51.8

 < 0.001

343

83.9

180

55.6

 < 0.001

Oral pill

20

5.1

15

4.4

0.664

33

8.1

11

3.4

0.008

IUCD

209

53.6

44

13.0

 < 0.001

126

30.8

100

30.9

0.987

Injectable

40

10.3

38

11.2

0.668

92

22.5

17

5.2

 < 0.001

Implant

29

7.4

10

3.0

0.007

1

0.2

0

0.0

N/A

Condom

51

13.1

53

15.7

0.317

80

19.6

36

11.1

0.002

Tubal ligation

3

0.8

18

5.3

 < 0.001

12

2.9

16

4.9

0.160

Any traditional method

2

0.5

19

5.6

 < 0.001

12

2.9

70

21.6

 < 0.001

Periodic abstinence

0

0.0

3

0.9

0.062

2

0.5

27

8.3

 < 0.001

Lactational amenorrhea

2

0.5

8

2.4

0.032

0

0.0

7

2.2

0.003

Withdrawal

0

0.0

8

2.4

0.002

10

2.4

36

11.1

 < 0.001

Back to article page

Contraception and Reproductive Medicine

ISSN: 2055-7426

Contact us