Background There is a dearth of qualitative studies exploring in-depth barriers that adolescents face in accessing and utilising reproductive health services (RHS) in Nigerian primary healthcare centres. Aim This study explored the barriers hindering adolescents’ access to and utilisation of RHS in primary healthcare centres. Setting This study was conducted in three primary healthcare centres in Kaduna North Local government area, Nigeria. Methods This study used an exploratory descriptive qualitative design. Fourteen adolescents and three RHS providers were selected and interviewed. The data collection methods included individual in-depth interviews with adolescents and key informant interviews with service providers. Interviews were conducted between January 2017 and April 2017. Thematic content analysis was used to analyse the data. Results This study identified three thematic barriers to adolescent’s utilisation of RHS. These included individual, social and health system barriers. Individual factors included the following: inadequate knowledge about RHS and poor attitudes of adolescents towards RHS; social factors such as parental influence, community and religious norms, financial constraints and stigma; and health system factors such as poor attitudes of service providers and inconvenient health facility opening hours hindered adolescents from utilising RHS. Most prominent was the strong influence of the social factors that affected adolescents to the extent that they felt constrained to freely utilise RHS out of a sense of commitment to religious values. Conclusion The findings highlight the need for the development of programmes that would foster collective responsibility for supportive environments within communities and health facilities for positive adolescent RHS experiences.

The need to improve the sexual and reproductive health (SRH) and rights of adolescents is increasingly acknowledged. Unfortunately, many adolescents in Nigeria face significant barriers to accessing quality sexual and reproductive health services (SRHS), despite national policies promoting SRHS for adolescents. This paper explores the stigma influencing access to and utilization of SRHS among adolescents in Kaduna, Northwestern Nigeria. This qualitative study conducted semi-structured interviews with 14 adolescents and three nurses. Thematic analysis was employed for the study. The findings indicate that although the adolescents knew the importance of accessing SRHS, they were not inclined to utilize the services because of stigma. The stigma-related barriers to accessing SRHS were related to religion, community norms and the negative attitude of the community and health workers all resulting in adolescents feeling shy and ashamed to use SRHS. Suggestions made to address these challenges and promote access included the provision of youthfriendly services (YFS) that respect confidentiality and privacy and also having dedicated youth-only health clinics. Health workers emphasized the need for creating awareness in the community about adolescent SRH and rights and the need to improve resources to provide comprehensive youth-friendly SRHS. There is also the need to introduce targeted stigma reduction training programs for health workers providing youth-friendly services. The findings can inform context-specific interventions in Nigeria and better implementation of the country's policies related to adolescent SRH.

No abstract

No abstract

STUDY QUESTION What are the intentions of men and women of reproductive age in the UK regarding reproduction and family building? SUMMARY ANSWER We identified six main categories of people; Avoiders, Betweeners, Completers, Desirers, Expectants and Flexers, for whom reproduction education strategies should be tailored differently to suit intentions. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY Several studies have highlighted poor fertility awareness across men and women of reproductive age. As the average age of first-time parents continues to rise, there has been a concerted effort from educators, healthcare professionals, charities, reproductive health groups and government policymakers, to improve fertility awareness. In order to ensure that these messages are effective and to deploy the best strategies, it is important to understand people’s reproductive health needs. This study therefore aimed to explore different reproductive intentions to aid tailoring of information to help individuals and couples achieve their family building desires. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION We conducted a mixed-method study via a UK-wide cross-sectional survey with 1082 participants and semi-structured interviews of 20 women and 15 men who agreed to follow-up interviews. Interviews lasted an hour on average. Ethics approval from UCL Research Ethics Committee. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS Survey participants were recruited nationwide via online newspaper and social media adverts. Interviewees were purposely sampled to include men and women from the reproductive age range (18–45 years), varying ethnicity and education background. Survey data were analysed using the Minitab statistical software package. Interview data were transcribed and analysed using the framework method. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE From the survey and interviews, we identified six key categories of people, grouped alphabetically, in a user-friendly manner to highlight a spectrum of reproductive intentions: Avoiders describes respondents who have no children and do not want to have children in the future; Betweeners describes those who already have child(ren) and want more in the future but are not actively trying to conceive; Completers describes those who have child(ren) but do not want more; Desirers describes those who are actively trying to conceive or plan to have child(ren) in the future; Expectants describes those who were pregnant at the time of the study; and Flexers describes those who may or may not already have and are unsure but or open to having child(ren) in the future. Analysis of survey data identified the following proportions in our study: Avoiders, 4.7%; Betweeners, 11.3%; Completers, 13.6%; Desirers, 36.9%; Expectants, 4.1%; and Flexers 28.4% and 2.4% preferring not to answer. There was one ‘other’ group from qualitative analysis, who would like to have children in the future but were unsure whether they could or had changing views. We recommend classifying as ‘Desirers’ or ‘Flexers’ for the purposes of fertility education. A majority of the survey population were trying to get pregnant; were pregnant; or planning to have a child in the future—whether actively, passively or simply open to the idea, with interviews providing deep insights into their family building decision-making. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION Due to the online recruitment method, there may be a bias towards more educated respondents. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS We developed a user-friendly, alphabetical categorization of reproductive intentions, which may be used by individuals, healthcare professionals, educators, special interest groups, charities and policymakers to support and enable individuals and couples in making informed choices to achieve their desired intentions, if and when they choose to start a family. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S) There was no external funding for this study. The authors report no competing interests. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER N/A.