Table 4 Logistic regression analysis to describe the correlates of acceptance of PPIUCD during the counseling session
Variable | Unadjusted odds ratio (95% CI) | p-value | Adjusted odds ratio (95% CI) | p-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Age in years | ||||
< 26 years | Ref | Ref | ||
26–35 years | 1.4 (1.1–1.8) | 0.007 | 1.3 (0.5–3.2) | 0.533 |
> 35 years | 2.2 (1.0-5.2) | 0.056 | 3.2 (0.8–12.9) | 0.101 |
Education | ||||
No | Ref | Ref | ||
educated | 3.4 (2.4–4.7) | 0.000 | 14.8 (6.9–31.6) | 0.000 |
Occupation | ||||
Employed | 1.9 (0.9–3.5) | 0.05 | 0.7 (0.3–1.8) | 0.494 |
Housewife | 1.5 (1.1–1.9) | 0.002 | 2.1 (1.7–3.2) | 0.040 |
Labourers | 1.6(0.0–1.0) | 0.998 | 1.9 (1.2–2.5) | 0.041 |
Others | Ref | Ref | ||
Socio-economic status | ||||
Poorest | Ref | Ref | ||
Lower middle | 1.7 (1.1–2.6) | 0.100 | 7.3 (2.7–19.7) | 0.000 |
Upper middle | 1.2 (0.7–1.8) | 0.503 | 2.4(0.9–6.2) | 0.066 |
Richest | 3.2 (1.9–5.6) | 0.000 | 5.5 (1.9–15.3) | 0.001 |
Religion | ||||
Sikhs | Ref | Ref | ||
Muslim | 1.5 (1.2–2.1) | 0.003 | 1.3(0.5–3.8) | 0.525 |
Christian | 0.5 (0.2–0.9) | 0.030 | 0.3 (0.9–1.2) | 0.091 |
Hindu | 6.4 (2.5–16.4) | 0.000 | 4.2 (1.2–18.4) | 0.049 |
Area of residence | ||||
Rural | Ref | Ref | ||
Urban | 2.6 (1.7–4.2) | 0.000 | 1.6 (0.7–3.6) | 0.204 |
Family Planning usage in past | ||||
no | Ref | Ref | ||
yes | 3.5 (1.8–6.6) | 0.000 | 2.9 (1.2–7.3) | 0.019 |
Gravid | ||||
Multigravida | Ref | Ref | ||
Primigravida | 1.6 (1.1–2.3) | 0.015 | 1.3 (0.6–2.6) | 0.461 |
Period of counseling | ||||
Antenatal | 1.3 (0.8-2.0) | 0.170 | 5.1 (2.1–12.6) | 0.000 |
Immediate postpartum | 0.5 (0.3–0.9) | 0.015 | 3.7 (1.4–9.4) | 0.006 |
Intrapartum | Ref | Ref |