Skip to content
ALL Metrics
-
Views
-
Downloads
Get PDF
Get XML
Cite
Export
Track
Research Article

Explaining withdrawal’s persistence: correlates of withdrawal use in Albania, Armenia, Jordan, and Turkey observed in a cross-sectional study

[version 1; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations]
PUBLISHED 09 Jun 2021
Author details Author details

Abstract

Background: Withdrawal dominates the contraceptive method mix in a geographical cluster of countries in South-Eastern Europe and Western Asia that have, in part, reached low fertility. This study examines the socio-demographic determinants associated with withdrawal use in Armenia, Albania, Jordan and Turkey that could explain withdrawal’s persistence and inform contraceptive programs in these unique settings.

Methods: Cross-sectional data on 31,569 married women 15 to 49 years were drawn from the Demographic and Health Surveys in Albania (2017-2018), Armenia (2015-2016), Jordan (2017-2018), and Turkey (2013). For each country, multinomial regression models estimating withdrawal use among all women and logistic regression models estimating withdrawal use among contraceptive users were used to evaluate the association with age, marital duration, parity, education, residence, and household wealth.

Results: The socio-demographic determinants associated with withdrawal use varied by country among all women and among all contraceptive users. While these associations were not all significant for all four countries general trends included that women were more likely to use withdrawal than not use contraception, but less likely to use withdrawal than other methods with increasing parity, higher education, and greater household wealth. Measures of association are reported by country for each correlate.

Conclusions: Despite the similar contraceptive mix in these four countries, no single set of factors was found to explain withdrawal’s persistence. Withdrawal’s prevalence in this geographical cluster may instead result from different balances of intertwined circumstances that include couples’ fertility decisions, access to modern contraception and availability of abortion services.

Keywords

Withdrawal, Family Planning, Contraception, Albania, Armenia, Jordan, Turkey

Introduction

Withdrawal or coitus interruptus is one of the most widely used male contraceptive methods in the world13. Withdrawal is often mentioned for its role in facilitating fertility declines in North America and Northern Europe prior to the introduction of modern contraceptives1,4,5. However, it remains an important contributor to the composition or mix of contraceptive methods used in some areas that have reached low fertility1,3,6.

Considered a traditional method, withdrawal is frequently grouped with less-effective folkloric methods and viewed as a transitional method or as an alternative of last resort when the only other option is to not use contraception2,6. Discussions of this method often adopt a problem-oriented approach and assume withdrawal’s low effectiveness translates to low desirability among users5,7. Yet effectiveness studies stem mostly from North America and may not be representative of societies where withdrawal is extensively and consistently practiced8. Furthermore, the persistence of withdrawal in many societies despite growing access to modern methods points to a more nuanced narrative.

A cluster of countries in South-Eastern Europe and Western Asia consistently reports high withdrawal prevalence up to 43.9% among married women of childbearing age in North Macedonia when considering the last ten years of public data (Table 1)3. The persistence of withdrawal use over time is particularly notable as evidenced by Figure 1 which depicts the prevalence of withdrawal use between 1990 and 2021 in the 15 countries with the highest prevalence in 2021. Studies focusing on factors to explain this exceptional birth control pattern point to women’s and men’s contraceptive competence, previous experience and evaluation of other methods as key drivers of withdrawal use. Fear of side effects and adverse health consequences from modern contraceptives, as well as preference for a natural, convenient, and free method are often cited4,913. Other researchers highlight cultural norms including interpretation of withdrawal as a mark of discipline and self-control in certain communities and the belief that withdrawal is as effective as modern methods11,14,15. There is little known about the factors that could explain the persistence of withdrawal use in this region.

Table 1. Most recent contraceptive and withdrawal prevalence and year of most recent available data for countries in the geographic withdrawal cluster of Southern Europe, Eastern Europe, and Western Asia.

CountryContraceptive
prevalence
Withdrawal
prevalence
Withdrawal Proportion of
Contraceptive Prevalence
Most recent
data (year)
Southern Europe
Albania46.042.291.72017-18
AndorraNANANANA
Bosnia and Herzegovina45.829.865.12011-12
Croatia58.047.682.11970
GibraltarNANANANA
Greece76.228.837.82001
Holy SeeNANANANA
Italy62.718.229.01995-96
Malta85.840.647.31993
Montenegro20.75.727.52018
North Macedonia59.943.973.32018-19
Portugal86.83.54.02006
San MarinoNANANANA
Serbia62.331.450.42019
Slovenia78.98.010.11994
Spain62.10.91.42018
Eastern Europe
Belarus71.26.18.62017
Bulgaria69.227.039.02007
Czechia72.07.310.11997
Hungary61.64.87.82008-09
Poland62.39.014.42014
Republic of Moldova56.010.318.42020
Romania69.86.18.72005
Russian Federation68.012.017.62011
SlovakiaNANANA1997
Ukraine65.414.622.32012
Western Asia
Armenia57.125.043.82015-16
Azerbaijan54.936.666.72011
Bahrain61.826.342.61995
CyprusNANANANA
Georgia40.63.27.92018
Iraq52.815.128.62018
Israel68.011.016.21987-88
Jordan51.813.025.12017
Kuwait52.05.711.01999
Lebanon54.55.19.42009
Oman29.78.729.32014
Qatar37.51.23.22012
Saudi Arabia24.60.93.72016
State of Palestine57.39.817.12019-20
Syrian Arab Republic58.31.72.92006
Turkey69.820.429.22018*
United Arab Emirates27.51.45.11995
Yemen33.52.67.82013

*2018 Turkey data are not in the public domain. Most recent DHS data are from 2013.

The four countries included in this study are bolded.

Abbreviations: DHS: Demographic and Health Surveys, NA: not available

Source: United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division (2021). World Contraceptive Use 2021 (POP/DB/CP/Rev2021).

17275ea0-2987-429d-ad44-96757efbe1f2_figure1.gif

Figure 1. Prevalence of withdrawal use between 1990 and 2021 in 15 countries with the highest prevalence in 2021, as reported by currently married women 15 to 49 years.

The literature often depicts withdrawal as a homogeneous phenomenon whereby cultural factors are the primary mediators of the practice. The geographical clustering of these countries in South-Eastern Europe and Western Asia undoubtedly supports the impact of common cultural factors. A few studies exploring the effect of socio-demographic variables on withdrawal use provide conflicting results and point away from a single narrative for all countries. For example, while one study in Iran found that younger, well educated women in urban areas were more likely to use withdrawal, another study also in Iran showed that wealthier, more educated, older women with lower parity preferred withdrawal14,16,17. In Turkey, withdrawal use was highest among poorer, less educated, older women with lower parity in rural areas17. To date, this mixed evidence has not been reconciled and its relevance to countries with the highest and most persistent withdrawal use in the South-Eastern Europe and Western Asia belt is unknown.

In addition, while withdrawal’s prevalence in this cluster has undoubtedly allowed many women to achieve their fertility intentions, there remains an unmet need for modern contraception in these countries. Given their unique contraceptive mix at present, that need may only be bridged through unique interventions tailored to these profiles. The aim of this study is to identify the socio-demographic determinants of withdrawal use compared to those not using contraception and those using other methods in four countries of the South-Eastern Europe and Western Asia belt. This information would not only provide additional explanations to the persistence of withdrawal use, but also expand the fulfillment of women’s reproductive goals in this setting.

Methods

Sample

Withdrawal use among childbearing aged women in union, as reported by the United Nations World Contraceptive Use 2021, was noted to be geographically clustered in three regions defined by the United Nations Statistics Division and made up of 44 countries: Southern Europe, Eastern Europe, and Western Asia (Figure 2)3. In these regions, withdrawal prevalence ranges from 0.9% (Saudi Arabia and Spain) to 43.9% (Serbia), when considering data less than 10 years old, and represents between 1.4% (Spain) and 91.7% (Albania) of the contraceptive method mix in these countries (Table 1). All countries in the geographic cluster with a withdrawal prevalence ≥ 10% and with publicly accessible Demographic and Health Survey (DHS) data less than 10 years old were included in this analysis: Albania 2017–1818, Armenia 2015–1619, Jordan 2017–1820, and Turkey 201321. Figure 3 outlines the selection process for the countries in this analysis. The DHS surveys are nationally representative household surveys with a cross sectional design and multiple questionnaires. This analysis utilizes data collected through the Woman’s Questionnaire. For each country, women ages 15 to 49 who were married or in union were the units of analysis. Survey data were weighted according to their complex sampling designs for the analysis.

17275ea0-2987-429d-ad44-96757efbe1f2_figure2.gif

Figure 2. Most recent withdrawal prevalence in South-Eastern Europe and Western Asia.

17275ea0-2987-429d-ad44-96757efbe1f2_figure3.gif

Figure 3. Selection of four study countries.

Variables

The outcome of interest was current contraceptive method use with a focus on withdrawal use. Although the focus is on a male-practiced method, this study relied on female respondents’ report of their partners’ behavior and characteristics which could differ from males’ reports. However, male respondents were not included in the surveys of all countries of interest and were not queried on contraceptive use using the same survey questions as used for women. The first analysis focused on withdrawal use among all married women and the outcome was categorized as no contraceptive method use, withdrawal use, or use of any other contraceptive method. The second analysis, restricted to contraceptive users, categorized the outcome as withdrawal use or use of another method. Demographic and socioeconomic covariates typically associated with family planning use were included: the continuous variables were ages of the respondent and her partner, number of living children, and marital duration, the categorical variables were highest education levels of the respondent and her partner (categorized as primary or no education, secondary education, or higher), urban or rural residence, and household wealth quintile. Household wealth is an asset-based measure which is scored following a factor analysis and divided into five groups that represent the poorest to the richest quintiles.

Statistical analyses

Multinomial logistic regression models were used to estimate the adjusted relative risk ratios (RRR) of withdrawal use and use of other methods compared to no contraceptive use. Logistic regression models were used to estimate the adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of withdrawal use compared to use of other methods. Models were adjusted for covariates described above. Statistical significance for alpha of 0.05 and 0.01 are reported. Analyses were conducted in Stata 15 (College Station, TX: StataCorp LP).

Results

Withdrawal prevalence ranged between 13.0% in Jordan and 42.2% in Albania among the four study countries (Table 2). Withdrawal was the most commonly used method in all countries except Jordan and represented between 25.2% (Jordan) and 91.8% (Albania) of the national method mix. Other male methods were not as prevalent in all four countries though male condoms were important in Armenia (14.7%) and Turkey (15.8%). No use of male sterilization was reported by the female respondents in any of the study countries.

Table 2. Current contraceptive use by currently married women age 15 to 49 years in 4 study countries.

AlbaniaArmeniaJordanTurkey
DHS year2017–20182015–20162017–20182013
Number of women74033895136166655
Contraceptive prevalence (%)
Any method46.057.151.873.5
Any female method2.417.533.732.0
Any male method43.739.718.141.4
    Withdrawal42.225.013.025.5
    Condom1.414.75.115.8
    Male sterilization0.00.00.00.0
Number of users3406222670574888
Contraceptive method mix (%)
Any female method5.130.665.043.6
Withdrawal91.843.725.234.8
Other male methods3.125.79.921.6

The characteristics of the 31,569 married women of reproductive age included in the study are disaggregated by contraceptive use and covariates of interest in Table 3. Withdrawal use was lowest among younger women and their partners in all countries and increased with age in Albania and Armenia. In Armenia and Jordan, and largely in Turkey, withdrawal use increased with the number of children, but the pattern was curvilinear in Albania with highest use at 1-2 children. Except in Turkey, withdrawal use was lowest when marital duration was under 10 years. In all countries except Albania, withdrawal use was more prevalent among rural women. Withdrawal use increased with higher levels of education of women and their partners in Albania and Jordan, while it decreased in Armenia and Turkey. Withdrawal use rose with increasing wealth in Albania, but decreased in Armenia. The relationship pattern was moderately curvilinear in Jordan and Turkey with more use reported by women in the middle household wealth quintiles. The associations between these factors and withdrawal use are further explored in the regression models detailed below.

Table 3. Sociodemographic characteristics of currently married women age 15 to 49 years by contraceptive method used in 4 study countries.

AlbaniaArmeniaJordanTurkey
Mean (Standard Error) or PercentageMean (Standard Error) or PercentageMean (Standard Error) or PercentageMean (Standard Error) or Percentage
withdrawal
N=3126
other
methods
N=280
non-use
N=3997
totalNwithdrawal
N=973
other
methods
N=1253
non-use
N=1669
totalNwithdrawal
N=1776
other
methods
N=5281
non-use
N=6559
totalNwithdrawal
N=1700
other
methods
N=3189
non-use
N=1767
totalN
Age of the respondent
(years)
36.1 (0.2)34.5 (0.6)30.3 (0.2)36.4 (0.1)740335.4 (0.3)34.1 (0.2)29.7 (0.2)34.7 (0.2)389534.9 (0.3)35.9 (0.2)34.2 (0.2)34.7 (0.1)1361634.4 (0.3)35.2 (0.2)27.0 (0.2)34.7 (0.1)6655
    <2534.83.361.910.073917.324.458.310.239810.621.268.213.3181325.828.545.711.0730
    25–3440.24.155.731.2231124.136.839.140.7158614.237.548.435.9489226.748.924.438.52560
    35–4447.34.648.136.5270428.535.236.334.6134813.447.838.834.9474825.256.917.937.22478
    45+40.12.157.822.3164924.317.458.314.456211.936.751.415.9216423.036.041.013.3888
Age of the partner
(years)
42.4 (0.3)41.7 (0.6)41.8 (0.2)42.1 (0.2)740340.2 (0.3)38.7 (0.2)39.3 (0.3)39.3 (0.2)389440.2 (0.4)41.6 (0.2)39.7 (0.2)40.5 (0.1)1361638.7 (0.3)39.5 (0.2)38.4 (0.3)39.0 (0.2)6651
    <2538.83.857.42.014514.618.666.82.71077.515.876.73.344520.319.560.22.6170
    25–3438.92.958.221.3157520.333.546.231.2121513.231.055.826.9365727.741.630.731.52093
    35–4443.34.752.033.4247327.738.633.734.6134614.443.142.534.8473224.356.818.838.22544
    45+43.23.553.343.4321027.625.047.431.5122612.142.645.335.1478225.345.429.327.71845
Marital duration (years)15.3 (0.2)14.1 (0.6)14.9 (0.2)15.0 (0.1)740315.2 (0.3)13.0 (0.2)13.9 (0.3)13.6 (0.2)389513.5 (0.3)15.0 (0.2)12.0 (0.2)13.2 (0.1)1361613.8 (0.2)14.7 (0.2)13.5 (0.3)13.9 (0.1)6655
    0–939.33.557.232.2238718.731.050.338.1148512.227.959.940.3548525.639.634.936.42424
    10–1945.54.949.632.8243028.040.731.332.7127414.247.538.332.6443725.357.017.735.12333
    20+41.93.055.134.9258529.724.246.229.2113612.944.442.727.1369425.847.426.828.51898
Number of living
children
1.9 (0.0)2.0 (0.1)1.1 (0.0)2.0 (0.0)74032.3 (0.0)2.1 (0.0)0.9 (0.0)2.0 (0.0)38953.5 (0.1)3.8 (0.0)2.3 (0.0)3.1 (0.0)136162.3 (0.0)2.5 (0.0)0.8 (0.0)2.2 (0.2)6655
    024.02.973.18.96591.60.897.76.72610.40.599.111.0149610.415.773.99.7645
    1–246.12.951.064.5477324.136.139.769.0269013.629.656.829.3398628.848.123.157.13801
    3+39.16.154.926.6197133.829.636.524.294515.150.334.659.7813424.357.018.733.22209
Highest education level,
Respondent
74033895136166655
    No or primary
education
40.03.556.649.0362636.322.940.85.42099.730.260.28.9121227.345.827.056.73771
    Secondary
education
43.23.253.630.2223531.027.141.942.9166913.640.645.854.7745425.648.825.731.52097
    Higher46.15.348.620.8154118.837.343.951.8201713.038.148.836.4495017.255.926.811.8787
Highest education level,
Partner
74013890136116643
    No or primary
education
38.63.857.645.8339032.222.745.19.537111.932.056.111.6157926.644.528.940.82713
    Secondary
education
43.93.352.840.1296428.828.742.548.5188513.640.046.457.1777028.147.724.242.52822
    Higher49.34.945.814.2104719.038.342.742.0163412.539.148.431.3426316.357.026.716.71108
Residence74033895136166655
    Rural41.93.754.443.0318032.525.641.943.0222116.736.446.989.71221428.240.331.519.71314
    Urban42.53.853.757.0422319.337.243.557.0167412.639.148.310.3140224.949.825.380.35341
Household wealth
quintile
74033895136166655
    Poorest38.13.758.220.4151334.724.041.417.869512.335.452.319.8269825.838.335.915.61038
    Poorer41.63.754.720.9155029.627.243.221.483413.637.948.521.1286828.142.529.519.51299
    Middle40.23.056.819.3142526.627.845.618.572115.439.745.020.9284828.347.524.220.51366
    Richer40.53.755.819.8146819.635.644.820.379014.439.945.720.8283524.952.422.721.51433
    Richest51.14.744.219.5144616.244.239.622.08558.841.349.917.4236721.355.223.522.81519

Table 4 examines the association between the sociodemographic correlates and women’s reported use of withdrawal and other methods versus not using contraception. Statistically significant findings are discussed here. Two letter country codes are used to reference specific measures of associations: AL for Albania, AR for Armenia, JO for Jordan, TR for Turkey. In all countries, women were significantly more likely to use withdrawal with increasing number of living children (AL RRR 1.16, AR RRR 2.02, JO RRR 1.62, TR RRR 1.53) than not use contraception. In Armenia, the relative risk for women to use withdrawal was lower with increasing age (RRR 0.96), but greater with increasing marital duration (RRR 1.04). In Jordan, the relative risk for withdrawal use was lower with each rising year of partner age (RRR 0.98). With regards to education, women with higher levels of education had a higher risk ratio to use withdrawal in Jordan (RRRs 2.18, 2.46) and women whose partners had a higher level of education had a higher relative risk for using withdrawal in Albania (RRR 1.43) than for not using contraception. However, in Turkey, women whose partners had a secondary level of education had higher relative risk ratios for using withdrawal (RRR 1.31) than no method. In Albania, Jordan, and Turkey, women from wealthier households compared to poorest were more likely to use withdrawal (AL RRR 1.77, JO RRRs 1.59 and 1.47, TR RRRs 1.66, 2.29, 2.40, 2.54) than not use contraception.

Table 4. Relative risk ratios from multinomial logistic regression of withdrawal use and any other method use compared to non-use on selected covariates of married women age 15 to 49 years for 4 study countries.

AlbaniaArmeniaJordanTurkey
Covariates    (Ref = non-use)RRRRRRRRRRRR
Use of withdrawal
Age of the respondent1.0030.957**0.9940.989
Age of the partner0.9990.9820.981**0.997
Marital duration0.9981.038**0.979*0.992
Number of living children1.156***2.018***1.615***1.532***
Highest education level, Respondent (ref = no or primary education) 
Secondary education1.0290.9772.182***1.040
Higher1.0610.7782.464***0.882
Highest education level, Partner (ref = no or primary education) 
Secondary education1.169*1.2911.1291.310***
Higher1.428**1.1921.1620.733**
Residence (ref = rural)0.8220.8190.8480.834*
Household wealth quintile (ref = poorest) 
Poorer1.203*0.9341.240*1.663***
Middle1.1550.9871.586***2.285***
Richer1.1700.9011.469***2.399***
Richest1.766***0.8310.9022.536***
Use of any other method
Age of the respondent0.9720.960**0.970***0.980*
Age of the partner1.0190.9950.9900.992
Marital duration0.963*0.9901.0001.007
Number of living children1.893***2.201***1.711***1.818***
Highest education level, Respondent (ref = no or primary education)
Secondary education1.2581.0122.142***1.246**
Higher2.213***1.1982.559***1.428**
Highest education level, Partner (ref = no or primary education) 
Secondary education0.8381.479**1.323***1.325***
Higher1.0001.820***1.336**1.276*
Residence (ref = rural)0.8691.2161.1630.997
Household wealth quintile (ref = poorest) 
Poorer1.1761.1231.247**1.818***
Middle0.8971.0151.458***2.732***
Richer1.1311.2671.378***3.337***
Richest1.7161.638***1.417***3.652***
Observations7,5533,99213,7306,815

*** p<0.01, ** p<0.05, * p<0.1

Abbreviations: RRR: relative risk ratio, ref: reference

The second panel of Table 4 compares the relative risk for using other contraceptive methods to no method use as associated with the same covariates. While relationship patterns with respondent and partner ages are negative, similar to the patterns for using withdrawal, the relationship with number of children for using any other method is stronger in terms of the magnitude of the relative risk ratios (AL RRR 1.89, AR RRR 2.20, JO RRR 1.71, TR RRR 1.82). The relative risk of using contraception other than withdrawal, over no use, is significantly and strongly associated in Jordan and Turkey with female education (JO RRR 2.14 and 2.56, TR RRR 1.25 and 1.43) and partner education (JO RRR 1.32 and 1.34, TR RRR 1.33 and 1.28). Similarly, the relative risk of using another method versus no contraception significantly increases with household wealth in these two countries. The associations are less consistently significant in Albania and Armenia.

Table 5 focuses on correlates among users, comparing women using withdrawal and those using other methods. In Albania and Jordan, the odds of women using withdrawal were significantly more with increasing age (AL aOR 1.05, JO aOR 1.03) compared to using other methods. The same association is noted in Armenia and Turkey but it is not statistically significant. In Albania, Jordan and Turkey, the odds of women using withdrawal were significantly less likely (AL aOR 0.53, JO aOR 0.91, TR aOR 0.80) than other methods with each additional living child. Increasing marital duration was only significantly associated with the odds of withdrawal use in Armenia (aOR 1.05). In Albania and Turkey, women with higher education had lower odds of using withdrawal (AL aOR 0.46, TR aOR 0.58) compared to women with no/primary education. Armenia and Jordan showed the same association although it was not significant. In Turkey, women’s partners with a higher education (aOR 0.57) had significantly lower odds of using withdrawal than other methods. The association was in the same direction in Armenia and Jordan, but not statistically significant. Women living in urban areas in Armenia and Jordan had lower odds (AR aOR 0.69, JO aOR 0.73) of using withdrawal. The same trend without significance was noted in Albania and Turkey. In Armenia and Jordan, women from the richest households (AR aOR 0.49, JO aOR 0.64) and in Turkey, women from the richer households (aOR 0.74) had lower adjusted odds of using withdrawal compared to women from the poorest households.

Table 5. Adjusted odds ratios from logistic regression of withdrawal users compared to non-withdrawal users on selected covariates of married women age 15–49 in 4 study countries.

AlbaniaArmeniaJordanTurkey
Covariates    (Ref = use of non withdrawal methods)aORaORaORaOR
Age of the respondent1.045**1.0041.028**1.009
Age of the partner0.9750.9810.9891.005
Marital duration1.0381.050**0.980*0.982*
Number of living children0.532***1.0020.907**0.802***
Highest education level, Respondent (ref = no or primary education) 
Secondary education0.7821.0251.0150.812**
Higher0.456***0.6840.9400.577***
Highest education level, Partner (ref = no or primary education) 
Secondary education1.385*0.8960.8600.987
Higher1.3390.674*0.8690.569***
Residence (ref = rural)0.9390.688***0.725***0.835*
Household wealth quintile (ref = poorest)
Poorer1.0090.8320.9930.927
Middle1.3400.9661.0710.855
Richer1.0230.694*1.0550.735**
Richest1.0250.492***0.640**0.716*
Observations3,0322,2726,9594,876

*** p<0.01, ** p<0.05, * p<0.1

Abbreviations: aOR: adjusted odds ratio, ref: reference

Discussion

In the four study countries, the high demand for withdrawal was matched by couples’ desire to limit childbearing indicating their likely intention to curb fertility with this practice, despite its likely lower effectiveness than other methods (data not shown). In fact, these countries reported between 6.9% (Armenia) and 25.8% (Turkey) of births in the past five years to be unintended or mistimed. While withdrawal dominated the method mix in all countries, those that achieved a higher contraceptive prevalence, had a more diverse mix suggesting a role for modern methods to decrease unmet need. Given that trajectory, this study aimed to further understand the persistent reliance on withdrawal and conversely low adoption of modern methods by investigating the correlates of withdrawal use in four geographically clustered countries in comparison to non-users and users of other methods.

General results are discussed first before examining country-level variations. The first regression model compares users of withdrawal and other methods with non-contracepting women. In general, women with more living children, higher level of education among themselves or their partners, and greater wealth were relatively more likely to use withdrawal than not use a method in multiple countries. The relative association of age, marital duration, and urban/rural residence with withdrawal use varied by country when compared to women not using contraception. By including non-users, this analysis also highlights correlates of contraceptive use when the same associations are noted in both groups of users: women were also more likely to use other methods with increasing number of children, education level and wealth than non-users in certain countries. These findings are in accordance with the general literature on determinants of family planning22. The second model is restricted to users; it compares withdrawal users with users of other methods to more precisely focus on the correlates associated with the selection of withdrawal use over other methods. Overall, having fewer living children and lower socioeconomic status in the form of lower education, rural residence, and lower wealth was associated with higher odds of withdrawal use compared to other methods.

In Albania, women with higher education were more likely to use any method other than withdrawal than not use contraception, but less likely to use withdrawal than other methods compared to women with no/primary education. In fact, women’s knowledge of modern methods was the lowest of these four countries (data not shown) and previous studies report widespread erroneous beliefs in withdrawal’s high effectiveness among users and health care providers23,24. This limited access to information appears to be playing an important role in Albania’s reliance on withdrawal and may be a remnant of restrictions on contraceptive education during pronatalist communist rule that are slowly being reversed25. Other common barriers such as cultural norms, access, and affordability have not been found to play as important roles in withdrawal’s widespread use and persistence, especially in light of Albania’s developed social marketing sector25,26.

In Armenia, withdrawal use, in part, can be explained by access; women were more likely to use withdrawal than other methods in rural areas and if they were poorer. Access to modern methods remains restricted to urban settings as a result of a Soviet-inherited centralized health system that has known difficulties with the transition27,28. Furthermore, availability and several economic disruptions have continued to restrict household spending and limited the development of social marketing programs, supporting evidence that withdrawal may be widely used especially by poorer households because it is free27.

In Turkey and Jordan, unequal access to modern methods also appears to impact withdrawal use: more educated and wealthier women are more likely to use withdrawal than not use contraception, and are less likely to use withdrawal than other methods. These findings are consistent with previous studies of withdrawal in Turkey and Jordan4,9,10,15,17,29. Importantly, modern methods are more prevalent and method mixes are more diverse in these two countries than in Albania and Armenia. However, the persistent prevalence of withdrawal reflects not only unequal societies, but possibly traditional enclaves where withdrawal is a practice intertwined with women’s empowerment. Of note, in both Turkey and Jordan having a partner with lower education level was associated with increased withdrawal use compared to other methods. This association could signal, in part, that withdrawal may be the decision of the male partner and possibly more widespread in less egalitarian societies30.

These analyses reveal that no single set of factors can explain the pattern of persistent withdrawal use in these four countries. Rather, some associations highlight that the decision to use withdrawal may result from a couple’s individual risk-benefit analysis weighing not using any contraception against using withdrawal against using another method to achieve their fertility intentions. For example, this study, similar to others, finds that women with fewer children were more likely to use withdrawal than women with more children in Albania, Jordan and Turkey15,17. The decision to use withdrawal may result from variations in couples’ perceived costs of potential contraceptive failure. Having another child may represent a very high cost for women who already have several children, but for women with fewer children, the perceived disadvantages of modern methods may be greater. Similarly, in Armenia and Jordan, the increase in withdrawal use with increasing age may result from a decrease in the perceived risk of fecundity, such that the ease of using withdrawal outweighs the calculated costs of other methods.

These individual factors for each couple are likely further affected by the specific healthcare landscape of a country including availability of contraceptive goods and services, dissemination of accurate and complete information about contraception, and affordability of contraceptives. These differ by country and are reflected in some of the associations between withdrawal use and education, wealth, and urban/rural residence detailed above. Finally, the existence of abortion services, as an additional available birth control option, also likely impacts a couples’ decision to use withdrawal. Abortion is integrated in the family planning strategy of Albania and widely available in Armenia as a former Soviet Republic that followed the Russian legalization model28. In Turkey, previous studies have found that withdrawal failure is one of the primary reasons behind abortions17. These contextual factors not only differ by country, but also likely differ in their weight on couples decisions, explaining the variety noted in the factors found to be associated with withdrawal across these four countries. Thus, while our study is limited to covariates available in DHS data, the findings point to a calculus of method choice by couples that will require temporal data of greater complexity to be further investigated.

While the study findings are limited by the cross-sectional design of these surveys, these are typically considered sufficient for an initial risk factor analysis. Unfortunately, data availability for countries in these regions is small preventing an exhaustive examination of the issue. Furthermore, as detailed previously, this analysis relies on surveys of female respondents about a male method which may affect the contraceptive distribution; while most of the correlates included are characteristics of women or household, the partners’ age and education level were reported by women and their accuracy may be limited. Finally, public data from these surveys tend to record only the most effective method reported. However, withdrawal can often be used in combination with other methods, such as rhythm or condoms.

These four countries have reached low levels of fertility with withdrawal as a, if not the, main method of contraception. Despite this, there remains an unmet need for contraception with the reported levels of mistimed or unintended births. Given that the current method mixes figure withdrawal use prominently, enabling every woman to achieve her fertility intentions relies, in part, on addressing barriers to modern contraception. To that end, programs can focus their attention on the correlates of withdrawal use. In general, reducing inequalities in women’s education to increase availability of information and improving decentralized access to affordable methods should provide women with modern methods and diversify the method mix. However, the absence of a single explanation for the prevalence of withdrawal in all these countries underlines the importance of considering the specific contexts in designing those efforts.

Data availability

Demographic and Health Surveys Program.

URL: https://dhsprogram.com/data/available-datasets.cfm

This project contains the following underlying data:

  • ALIR71FL.DTA (Individual Recode Stata dataset for Albania Standard DHS 2017–18)

  • AMIR72FL.DTA (Individual Recode Stata dataset for Armenia Standard DHS 2015–16)

  • JOIR73FL.DTA (Individual Recode Stata dataset for Jordan Standard DHS 2017–18)

  • TRIR62FL.DTA (Individual Recode Stata dataset for Turkey Standard DHS 2013)

Data are available under the terms of the Creative Commons Zero "No rights reserved" data waiver (CC0 1.0 Public domain dedication).

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 1
VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 09 Jun 2021
Comment
Author details Author details
Competing interests
Grant information
Copyright
Download
 
Export To
metrics
Views Downloads
Gates Open Research - -
PubMed Central
Data from PMC are received and updated monthly.
- -
Citations
CITE
how to cite this article
Fruhauf T, Al-Attar G and Tsui AO. Explaining withdrawal’s persistence: correlates of withdrawal use in Albania, Armenia, Jordan, and Turkey observed in a cross-sectional study [version 1; peer review: 1 approved, 2 approved with reservations]. Gates Open Res 2021, 5:92 (https://doi.org/10.12688/gatesopenres.13295.1)
NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.
track
receive updates on this article
Track an article to receive email alerts on any updates to this article.

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 1
VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 09 Jun 2021
Comment
Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article:
Approved - the paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested
Approved with reservations - A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit.
Not approved - fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions

Are you a Gates-funded researcher?

If you are a previous or current Gates grant holder, sign up for information about developments, publishing and publications from Gates Open Research.

You must provide your first name
You must provide your last name
You must provide a valid email address
You must provide an institution.

Thank you!

We'll keep you updated on any major new updates to Gates Open Research

Sign In
If you've forgotten your password, please enter your email address below and we'll send you instructions on how to reset your password.

The email address should be the one you originally registered with F1000.

Email address not valid, please try again

You registered with F1000 via Google, so we cannot reset your password.

To sign in, please click here.

If you still need help with your Google account password, please click here.

You registered with F1000 via Facebook, so we cannot reset your password.

To sign in, please click here.

If you still need help with your Facebook account password, please click here.

Code not correct, please try again
Email us for further assistance.
Server error, please try again.