Married couples’ dynamics, gender attitudes and contraception use in Savannakhet Province, Lao PDR

Figures & data

Figure 1. Conceptual model used for the research.

Figure 2. Savannakhet province (in red) in Lao PDR. Source: Wikipedia.

Table 1. Count, frequencies and odds ratio of demographics variables (adjusted for age, district, educational attainment, occupation, and income).

Variables		N (%)	% using contra-ception within couple	Significance in relation to contraception use	p-value	95% CI Lower	95% CI Higher
Contraceptive use within couple^a	No	162 (41.5%)	-	-	-	-	-
	Yes	228 (58.5%)	-	-	-	-	-
	Total	390 (100.0%)
Types of contraceptive used	Injection	52 (44.4%)	-	-	-	-	-
	Contraceptive pill	37 (31.6%)	-	-	-	-	-
	Implant	10 (8.5%)	-	-	-	-	-
	Female sterilisation	6 (5.1%)	-	-	-	-	-
	IUD	6 (5.1%)	-	-	-	-	-
	Condoms	5 (4.3%)	-	-	-	-	-
	Natural methods	4 (3.4%)	-	-	-	-	-
Demographics^b
Gender	Male	200 (50.0%)	-	-	-	-	-
	Female	200 (50.0%)	-	-	-	-	-
	Total	400 (100.0%)
Ethnicity	Lao-Tai	265 (67.1%)	63.6%	-	-	-	-
	Mon-Khmer	130 (32.9%)	46.9%	-	-	-	-
	Total	395 (100%)
Religion	Buddhism	261 (65.7%)	63.2%	-	-	-	-
	Spiritualism^c and others	136 (34.3%)	49.3%	-	-	-	-
	Total	397 (100%)
District	Outhoumphone (urban)	200 (50.0%)	63.5%	1(ref)
	Seponh (rural)	200 (50.0%)	53.5%	1.558	0.131	0.877	2.769
	Total	400 (100%)
Age	19 and under	26 (6.5%)	37.5%	0.455***		0.173	1.192
	20–24	48 (12.0%)	41.7%	0.527***		0.265	1.048
	25–34	148 (37.0%)	53.8%	1 (ref)	0.000
	35–44	137 (34.3%)	73.1%	2.431***		1.411	4.186
	45 and above	41 (10.3%)	59.0%	1.259***		0.583	2.716
	Total	400 (100%)
Educational attainment	No education	121 (30.3%)	52.1%	0.740	0.257	0.440	1.245
	Primary school and higher	278 (69.7 %)	61.1%	1 (ref)
	Total	399 (100%)
Occupation	Farmer	355 (89.6%)	57.3%	1(ref)
	Other	41 (10.4%)	69.2%	1.504	0.319	0.674	3.357
	Total	396 (100%)
Income	Low (<6 M kip)	209 (53.0%)	51.2%	1 (ref)
	High (>6 M kip)	185 (47.0%)	66.1%	1.761*	0.024	1.079	2.875
	Total	394 (100%)

^a Contraception use within couple means any partner can be using contraception.

^b Age, district, educational attainment, occupation, and income were all in the same regression analysis. However, ethnicity and religion were not included in the regression analysis since they were too correlated to the district.

^cSpiritualism is an overarching term for the several ethnic religions practiced in Lao.

^*Significant at p value <0.05. **Significant at p value <0.01. ***Significant at p value <0.001

Table 2. Count, frequencies and odds ratio of gender attitudes and decision making.

Variables			N (%)	% using contra-ception within couple	Significance in relation to contra-ception use	p-value	95% CI Lower	95% CI Higher
Gender attitudes^a
Gender transcendent scale^b (gender equality-oriented scale)	Women	Low	9 (4.6%)	44.4%	1.420		0.188	10.721
		Medium	36 (18.6%)	68.6%	2.622		0.905	7.596
		High	149 (76.8%)	56.6%	1(ref)	0.206
	Men	Low	4 (2.0%)	75.0%	582,612,039.8		0.000	-
		Medium	54 (27.1%)	54.7%	0.813		0.372	1.776
		High	141 (70.9%)	59.1%	1(ref)	0.874
	Total	Low	13 (3.3%)	53.8%	1.576		0.352	7.067
		Medium	90 (22.9%)	60.2%	1.107		0.618	1.984
		High	290 (73.8%)	57.8%	1(ref)	0.816
Gender-linked scale^b (oriented towards gender-specific roles)	Women	Low	140 (74.9%)	60.1%	1(ref)	0.954
		Medium	44 (23.5%)	57.1%	0.873		0.364	2.095
		High	3 (1.6%)	33.3%	0.965		0.029	32.528
	Men	Low	146 (75.6%)	58.0%	1(ref)	0.124
		Medium	45 (23.3%)	65.1%	2.526		1.038	6.149
		High	2 (1.0%)	0.0%	0.000		0.000	-
	Total	Low	286 (75.3%)	59.1%	1(ref)	0.133
		Medium	89 (23.4%)	61.2%	1.410		0.780	2.549
		High	5 (1.3%)	20.0%	0.149		0.11	2.006
Wife battering considered acceptable	Women	Never	18 (10.2%)	70.6%	1.180		0.292	4.767
		In some cases,	86 (48.9%)	59.8%	1(ref)	0.941
		In most cases	72 (40.9%)	51.4%	0.926		0.433	1.979
	Men	Never	27 (13.7%)	57.7%	0.798		0.305	2.086
		In some cases	140 (71.1%)	61.6%	1(ref)	0.130
		In most cases	30 (15.2%)	46.4%	0.378		0.147	0.974
	Total	Never	45 (12.2%)	62.8%	0.926		0.443	1.937
		In some cases,	226 (60.6%)	60.9%	1(ref)	0.450
		In most cases	102 (27.3%)	50.0%	0.704		0.409	1.213
Decision making^c
On financial issues	Women	Woman involved	153 (76.9%)	64.2%	1 (ref)
		Woman not involved	46 (23.1%)	39.1%	0.410*	0.046	0.171	0.983
	Men	Woman involved	137 (68.5%)	60.0%	1 (ref)
		Woman not involved	63 (31.5%)	55.0%	0.975	0.954	0.408	2.326
	Total	Woman involved	290 (72.7%)	62.2%	1 (ref)
		Woman not involved	109 (27.3%)	48.1%	0.638	0.130	0.356	1.141
Women’s freedom to go outside	Women	No freedom	159 (83.7%)	56.8%	1 (ref)	0.977
		Low freedom	18 (9.5%)	72.2%	0.960		0.268	3.434
		High freedom	13 (6.8%)	61.5%	0.872		0.245	3.102
	Men	No freedom	159 (79.5%)	55.8%	1 (ref)	0.506
		Low freedom	33 (16.5%)	66.7%	0.587		0.194	1.773
		High freedom	8 (4.0%)	75.0%	0.386		0.031	4.840
	Total	No freedom	318 (81.5%)	56.3%	1 (ref)	0.731
		Low freedom	51 (13.1%)	68.6%	0.755		0.336	1.694
		High freedom	21 (5.4%)	66.7%	0.770		0.265	2.239
On the number of children to have	Women	Woman involved	169 (84.5%)	58.2%	1 (ref)
		Woman not involved	31 (15.5%)	60.0%	1.218	0.701	0.445	3.334
	Men	Woman involved	171 (88.1%)	56.9%	1 (ref)
		Woman not involved	23 (11.9%)	63.6%	1.865	0.428	0.400	8.692
	Total	Woman involved	340 (86.3%)	57.5%	1 (ref)
		Woman not involved	54 (13.7%)	61.5%	1.380	0.438	0.611	3.116
On contra-ception use	Women	Woman only	38 (23.0%)	76.3%	1.504	0.403	0.578	3.911
		Couple or other	127 (77.0%)	61.8%	1 (ref)
	Men	Woman only	30 (23.4%)	58.6%	0.816	0.668	0.321	2.072
		Couple or other	98 (76.6%)	61.5%	1 (ref)
	Total	Woman only	68 (23.2%)	68.7%	1.052	0.876	0.556	1.992
		Couple or other	225 (76.8%)	61.6%	1 (ref)
Communication^d
On desired number of children	Women	Often discussed	127 (63.8%)	62.6%	1 (ref)	0.007
		Not very often discussed	43 (21.6%)	37.2%	0.511**		0.180	1.450
		Never discussed	29 (14.6%)	71.4%	3.937**		1.213	12.779
	Men	Often discussed	85 (42.5%)	53.7%	1 (ref)	0.189
		Not very often discussed	98 (49.0%)	65.6%	1.491	0.337	0.660	3.371
		Never discussed	17 (8.5%)	41.2%	0.495	0.283	0.137	1.785
	Total	Often discussed	212 (53.1%)	59.0%	1 (ref)	0.446
		Not very often discussed	141 (35.3%)	56.8%	1.110	0.743	0.595	2.068
		Never discussed	46 (11.5%)	60.0%	1.678	0.207	0.751	3.751
On birth control	Women	Often discussed	109 (55.9%)	71.4%	1 (ref)	0.000
		Not very often discussed	29 (14.9%)	62.1%	0.911***		0.291	2.852
		Never discussed	57 (29.2%)	33.9%	0.167***		0.065	0.433
	Men	Often discussed	44 (22.4%)	64.3%	1 (ref)	0.004
		Not very often discussed	103 (52.6%)	68.6%	1.055**		0.397	2.806
		Never discussed	49 (25.0%)	31.9%	0.280**		0.103	0.763
	Total	Often discussed	153 (39.1%)	69.4%	1 (ref)	0.000
		Not very often discussed	132 (33.8%)	67.2%	0.837***		0.424	1.649
		Never discussed	106 (27.1%)	33.0%	0.210***		0.110	0.401

^aGender-linked scale, gender-transcendent scale, and wife battering variable were in the same regression analysis (adjusted for age and income).

^b Cronbach’s alpha of 0.75 and 0.79 for the gender transcendent scale (5 questions) and the gender-linked scale (8 questions) respectively, indicating the adequate reliability of both scales.

^c Financial decision making, women’s freedom to go outside, decision making on number of children, and decision making on contraception use were in the same regression analysis (adjusted for age and income).

^d Both variables on communication were in the same regression analysis (adjusted for age and income)

^*Significant at p value <0.05. **Significant at p value <0.01. ***Significant at p value <0.001.