Background Infertility is a long-standing reproductive health issue, which affects both men and women worldwide and it is especially problematic in the Global South. In sub-Saharan Africa, understanding the current availability of diagnostic and treatment services for infertility is important because this could guide health systems to improve access to fertility care for all. Yet, few studies have explicitly started from a health system perspective to grasp the availability and integration of infertility services in sub-Saharan Africa. This quantitative study, the first in The Gambia, West Africa, examines the availability of infertility services in public and private facilities as part of a wider endeavour to improve fertility care policy and practice in the country. Methods A cross-sectional survey using Qualtrics was administered to 38 health facilities. The survey was carried out between March and August 2021 and involved closed-ended questions. Data analysis consisted of descriptive statistics and t-tests performed using SPSS version 26. Results A total of 25 facilities (66%) offered infertility services, of which 13 (52%) were public and 12 (47%) private. Although the availability of screening tests was similar between health institutions, most diagnostic and treatment services were available only in the private sector. Treatment services included: (i) ovarian stimulation (n = 16, 42%); (ii) reversal of tubal ligation and/or blockage (tuboplasty) (n = 4, 11%); and (iii) intrauterine insemination (n = 3, 8%). Assisted reproductive technologies such as IVF and ICSI were not available in public or private sectors. The Gambian health management information system lacked a dedicated space to capture data on infertility. Reported barriers to integration of infertility services in existing reproductive health services included a lack of specialised training, an absence of national guidance on infertility management, and a shortage of appropriate equipment, supplies, and medication. Conclusions The availability of infertility services in The Gambia follows a trajectory that is similar to other SSA countries in which services are mostly obtainable through the private sector. Yet, access to private care is expensive and geographically restricted, which exacerbates inequalities in accessing fertility care for all. Improving the provision of infertility services in the public sector requires systematically capturing data on infertility and investing in the provision of a full-range fertility care package.

BACKGROUND Infertility affects over 50 million couples worldwide and impacts people’s social and emotional wellbeing. In low- and middle-income countries, particularly across Africa, the inclusion of fertility care into reproductive health (RH) policies remains fragmented or non-existent. OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE This review aims to provide a framework for understanding the inclusion (or lack thereof) of fertility care in RH policies in African settings. It synthesizes the barriers and facilitators to such inclusion, with a view to uncovering the positioning of fertility care in broader health systems and on the agendas of key stakeholders such as health policymakers and practitioners. SEARCH METHODS A qualitative evidence synthesis was performed, systematically searching papers and grey literature. Searches were conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science and Scopus between February and April 2020. No date restrictions were applied. Language was limited to publications written in English and French. Two reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts, and extracted data, applying thematic coding. The quality of the included papers was evaluated using The Joanna Briggs Institute Checklist for Text and Opinion Papers. OUTCOMES The search identified 744 papers, of which 20 were included. Findings were organized under four cross-cutting categories, namely: perceived importance of infertility; influence of policy context; resource availability and access; and perceived quality of care. Across these categories, key barriers to the inclusion of fertility care in RH policies were limited political commitment, under-recognition of the burden of infertility and high costs associated with ART. Conversely, facilitators comprised specialized training on infertility for healthcare providers, standard procedures for ART safety and guidelines and North–South/South–South collaborations. WIDER IMPLICATIONS The inclusion of fertility care in African RH policies depends upon factors that include the recognition of infertility as a disease, strong political engagement and proactivity and affordability of ART through opportunities for partnership with the private sector, which ease costs on the public health system. Further qualitative and quantitative research, including context-specific analysis and in-depth comparative approaches across diverse African countries, will help to delineate differential impacts of local and global factors on fertility care to address this neglected RH issue.

Background Infertility remains a global reproductive health burden with the highest prevalence in low and middle-income countries. In sub-Saharan Africa, the ability to procreate holds great societal importance. Couples, and particularly women, with infertility can face devastating challenges, leading to social stigma, isolation and/or divorce. However, attention to addressing infertility is lacking in sub-Saharan Africa. In The Gambia, where this study is based, little is known about the potential for introduction of assisted reproductive technologies (ART) in the public health sector. Methods A quantitative survey was conducted using detailed questionnaires on infertility services available, staff knowledge, perceived barriers, and personal motivation to support assisted reproductive technologies. Data was collected electronically between April and June 2021 from healthcare providers (n = 70) in eleven health facilities throughout the country, as well as from medical students (n = 55) enrolled at The University of The Gambia. Results Basic infertility services were found to be lacking in the rural areas. Furthermore, 39% of staff (n = 27) providing fertility care had not receive any formal training on the topic. However, 91% of staff (n = 64) showed interest in acquiring additional knowledge and had a positive attitude towards supporting the introduction of ART. Perceived challenges of doing so included: (i) the competing importance of other health priorities; and (ii) religious and cultural barriers. Conclusion This survey highlights that expansion of infertility services is needed, especially in rural areas. Staff perceived the introduction of ART as important, but this should be coupled with specialized training, as most medical staff had not received any formal infertility training. Future care providers (current medical students) showed both interest in ART and reported having received some basic training in infertility management. Given the reported lack of infrastructure and services, additional targeted investment in infertility care, including ART, will be needed to improve reproductive health for all, countrywide.