Publication

Correlates of long-acting reversible contraceptive (LARC) use among young women in Southern Africa: a secondary analysis from HPTN 082

Citation

Ssemambo PK, Burton M, Mirembe BG, Nakabiito C, Donnell D, Beauchamp G, Delany-Moretlwe S, Celum C, Velloza J.. Correlates of long-acting reversible contraceptive (LARC) use among young women in Southern Africa: a secondary analysis from HPTN 082. 2025 PMC12458495

Abstract

Background: Long-acting reversible contraception (LARCs), including intrauterine devices (IUDs), injectables, and implants, are highly effective in preventing unintended pregnancies but LARC use rates are low among African adolescents and young women (AGYW). Understanding factors associated with LARC uptake and continuation among African AGYW may provide insights into strategies to promote LARC use. Methods: We conducted a secondary data analysis from the HIV Prevention Trials Network (HPTN 082) pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) study, which enrolled 451 AGYW in Zimbabwe and South Africa ages 16-25 years, who reported vaginal or anal sex in the prior month, and reported PrEP interest (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02732730). Contraception and contraceptive counseling were offered at enrollment and visits at 4, 8, 13, 26, and 39 weeks post enrollment, with follow-up through 52 weeks. The outcome variable was any LARC use, defined as copper or hormonal IUDs, injectable contraceptives, and implants. We performed descriptive analyses and regression models to assess contraceptive use patterns and characteristics associated with LARC use and condomless sex. Results: Overall, 60% (299/499) of AGYW adopted a LARC method at enrollment and 78% (234/299) persisted on a LARC method during follow up. Among the 449 women who used contraception at enrollment and/or during follow-up, 38 (8.4%) switched between non-LARC to LARC and 34 (7.5%) discontinued contraception at some point during the study. AGYW not using a LARC at enrollment were more likely to switch contraceptive method through week 39 compared to those already using a LARC (32.7% vs. 14.7%, respectively; p-value