Scaling Up Access to Implants: A Summative Evaluation of the Implants Access Program

Abstract

Enhancing supply chain data visibility and coordination to limit stock-outs n Leveraging existing delivery capacity and strengthening capacity in targeted areas n Coordinating global and country-level stakeholders to address key challenges Key Implications n Donors, policy makers, and implementing partners should align method-specific efforts to support broader family planning goals and implementation plans at the global and country level. n Donors should engage private-sector manufacturers to identify mutually beneficial opportunities for collaboration to address price barriers. n National stakeholders and implementing partners should prioritize efforts to improve supply chain visibility, increase efficiency and sustainability of provider training, and support community sensitization and awareness raising to ensure clients can exercise free and informed contraceptive method choice.

Facility readiness to remove subdermal contraceptive implants in 6 sub-Saharan African countries

“…As part of a broader movement to promote the use of long-acting reversible contraceptive (LARC) methods, scholars and advocates have been eager to expand access to and use of the contraceptive implant, citing the implant's 5-year duration, high effectiveness, and low levels of user error. 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 Recent work on contraceptive implants has described the past few years as a period of “liftoff” and “blossoming” for implants in sub-Saharan Africa in particular, with population-based survey data showing considerable growth in implant use across an array of sociodemographic groups in that region. 3 In Kenya, for example, implant use grew from 1.7% of married women in 2003 to 18.1% in 2016.…”

Expanding long-acting contraceptive options: a prospective cohort study of the hormonal intrauterine device, copper intrauterine device, and implants in Nigeria and Zambia

“…2 Recent efforts to expand access to implants have led to substantial increases in their use in a number of low-income and middle-income countries. 3 , 4 However, the use of the copper intrauterine device remains low in many of these countries because of barriers related to both supply and demand. 5 …”

What Have We Learned? Implementation of a Shared Learning Agenda and Access Strategy for the Hormonal Intrauterine Device

“…2018. 55 Similarly, broader introduction of a subcutaneous depot medroxyprogesterone acetate injectable was achieved when pricing agreements for procurement in LMICs were negotiated with the manufacturer. 60 However, while these strategies have helped increase access to both methods, they have also posed challenges.…”

“…Other recent coordination mechanisms have also focused on specific methods (e.g., the Implant Access Group and DMPA-SC Access Group). Although these groups have been effective in helping expand access, 55,56 their method-specific approaches may constrain countries' ability to plan for product introduction across method categories and may impede crosscutting resource mobilization. Siloed introduction efforts may also contribute to product introduction fatigue among stakeholders at the country level.…”