Skip to main content

Table 2 Modern contraceptive use, overall and by recent migration history and HIV serostatus

From: The intersection between migration, HIV, and contraceptive use in Uganda: a cross-sectional population-based study

Modern contraceptive method

Long-term resident HIV-seronegative

N (%)

Long-term resident HIV-seropositive

N (%)

Recent in-migrant HIV-seronegative

N (%)

Recent in-migrant HIV- seropositive

N (%)

Total

N (%)

Pill

138 (5.9)

14 (2.9)

21 (4.4)

2 (1.7)

175 (5.1)

Condom

297 (12.7)

99 (20.8)

53 (11.0)

19 (16.5)

468 (13.7)

Depo-Provera

690 (29.4)

148 (31.1)

138 (28.8)

30 (26.1)

1006 (29.4)

IUD

48 (2.1)

9 (1.9)

10 (2.1)

2 (1.7)

69 (2.0)

Implant

113 (4.8)

28 (5.9)

28 (5.8)

5 (4.4)

174 (5.1)

Bilateral tubal ligation

31 (1.3)

8 (1.6)

0 (0.0)

1 (0.9)

40 (1.1)

Unsatisfied contraceptive demanda

1038 (44.3)

174 (36.6)

232 (48.3)

56 (48.7)

1500 (43.9)

Unsatisfied contraceptive demand, excluding condomsa

1326 (56.5)

269 (56.6)

283 (59.0)

75 (65.2)

1953 (57.2)

  1. aUnsatisfied contraceptive demand was defined as non-use of a modern contraceptive method; in sensitivity analysis, condoms were excluded from modern contraceptive methods