Back

Exploring Male Involvement In Contraceptive Decision-Making And Support For Long-Acting Reversible Methods Among Couples In Kampala, Uganda

nyasulu, b.; Ngomi, N.; Kibonire, R. A.; goparaju, a.

2026-03-18 public and global health
10.64898/2026.03.11.26348000 medRxiv
Show abstract

Male involvement in family planning remains a critical yet underexplored factor influencing contraceptive uptake and decision-making support for long-acting reversible contraceptives (LARCs) in Kampala, Uganda. This mixed-methods study assessed male participation in decision-making and support for long-acting reversible contraceptives among couples in Kampala. The study involved 362 male participants who completed structured questionnaires, six focus group discussions (FGDs) conducted with both men and women, and five key informant interviews (KIIs) with healthcare providers. Ethical approval was obtained from the Kampala International University Research Ethics Committee and the Uganda National Council for Science and Technology. Quantitative findings revealed that 96.4% of men reported that their partners discussed contraception with healthcare providers ({chi}{superscript 2} = 31.366, p < 0.001), yet only 9.7% of men accompanied their partners to clinics. Male support for family planning was primarily financial (60.2%), while joint decision-making on LARCs was reported by only 38.7% ({chi}{superscript 2} = 2.776, p = 0.596). Key determinants of male involvement included marital status, education level, and number of children. However, cultural norms ({chi}{superscript 2} = 42.813, p < 0.000) and religious beliefs ({chi}{superscript 2} = 29.402, p < 0.021) were identified as significant barriers to male participation. Qualitative findings from FGDs and KIIs echoed the limited involvement of men in family planning services, attributing this to entrenched gender norms, misconceptions about contraceptives, and the perception that reproductive health services are primarily for women. Although 44.2% of participants indicated that mens concerns were addressed during consultations, 77.3% reported limited availability of couple-focused counseling ({chi}{superscript 2} = 6.294, p = 0.178). The study concludes that male involvement in family planning decision-making and support for LARCs remains low, largely due to socio-cultural barriers and limited male-friendly services. The study recommends strengthening male engagement strategies by training health workers on inclusive counseling, involving community and religious leaders in awareness campaigns, and promoting male-friendly and couple-centered reproductive health services through community-based platforms.

Matching journals

The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS Global Public Health
293 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
40.7%
2
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 8%
19.2%
50% of probability mass above
3
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 5%
4.1%
4
Frontiers in Public Health
140 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.4%
5
BMC Health Services Research
42 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
2.1%
6
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
124 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.8%
7
BMC Public Health
147 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.5%
8
Heliyon
146 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.4%
9
Tropical Medicine and Infectious Disease
12 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.3%
10
Journal of Global Health
18 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.0%
11
The American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene
60 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.9%
12
Cureus
67 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.8%
13
Malaria Journal
48 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
14
Tropical Medicine & International Health
15 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.8%
15
Social Science & Medicine
15 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
0.7%
16
BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth
20 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
0.7%
17
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 78%
0.7%
18
Acta Tropica
13 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.5%
19
Health Expectations
12 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.5%
20
Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness
16 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.5%
21
Archives of Public Health
12 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
0.5%
22
JMIR Research Protocols
18 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.5%