Utilization of Reproductive Health Services Among Young People in Sawua, Ghana

bAckground: Although several reproductive health interventions, such as the Adolescent Reproductive Health Policy, have been introduced in Ghana, many young people find it uneasy seeking for reproductive health information and services. Yet, most studies about utilization of reproductive health services in Ghana focus on adolescents without considering young people aged above 19 years. objectIves: This article appraises the utilization of reproductive health services among young people aged 15–24 years. It covers the sources of their reproductive health services, while barriers inhibiting them from obtaining their desired services have also been highlighted. Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted at Sawua community in Ghana, using questionnaires. Responses from 240 young people (aged 15–24 years) living in the community were used as the database for this paper. results: Generally, less than half of the young people utilized reproductive health services within 12 months preceding the survey. The media, their peers, and health service providers were the main sources of reproductive health information and services for them while shyness, financial constraints, and opposite gender of health service providers were the reported deterrents to the use of reproductive health services. conclusIons: There is need for professional reproductive health services for the young people, which takes cognizance of gender and age differences, as well as affordability of the reproductive health products and services. keywords: Sawua, Ghana, young people, reproductive health services, utilization CitAtion: addo and Gyamfuah. Utilization of Reproductive Health services among Young People in sawua, Ghana. Clinical Medicine Reviews in Patient Care 2015:3 1–6 doi: 10.4137/CMRPC.s29924. tYPE: Original Research RECEivEd: May 26, 2015. RESUbmittEd: June 30, 2015. ACCEPtEd foR PUbliCAtion: July 07, 2015. ACAdEmiC EditoR: Garry walsh, editor in Chief PEER REviEw: two peer reviewers contributed to the peer review report. Reviewers’ reports totaled 633 words, excluding any confidential comments to the academic editor. fUndinG: authors disclose no funding sources. ComPEtinG intEREStS: Authors disclose no potential conflicts of interest. CoRRESPondEnCE: [email protected] CoPYRiGHt: © libertas academica ltd. Paper subject to independent expert blind peer review. all editorial decisions made by independent academic editor. Upon submission manuscript was subject to antiplagiarism scanning. Prior to publication all authors have given signed confirmation of agreement to article publication and compliance with all applicable ethical and legal requirements, including the accuracy of author and contributor information, disclosure of competing interests and funding sources, compliance with ethical requirements relating to human and animal study participants, and compliance with any copyright requirements of third parties. this journal is a member of the Committee on Publication ethics (COPe). Published by libertas academica. learn more about this journal.