Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2025 Aug 30;25(1):1155.
doi: 10.1186/s12913-025-13278-4.

Comparative perceptions of wait times for family planning services among contraceptive users and mystery clients in Kisumu, Kenya: a mixed methods analysis

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Comparative perceptions of wait times for family planning services among contraceptive users and mystery clients in Kisumu, Kenya: a mixed methods analysis

Stephanie Chung et al. BMC Health Serv Res. .

Abstract

Background: Long wait times at health facilities negatively affect contraceptive access and cause dissatisfaction with care. Conventional data collection methods, such as population-based surveys and exit interviews, may not accurately capture wait times due to methodological challenges including recall and social desirability bias.

Methods: We compared mystery client observations conducted in all public facilities in Kisumu County, Kenya with data from a population-based sample of women of reproductive age (18-49, n = 744) in Kisumu County. We compared recalled wait times from women who used public facilities in the last year for their last contraceptive method with wait times recorded by mystery clients (n = 401) presenting as first-time family planning users, and analyzed quotes from mystery clients who mentioned long waits.

Results: Most mystery clients reported wait times between 1-2 h (49%) or over 2 h (33%), whereas most women surveyed in their homes recalled being seen within 30 min at their most recent visit for family planning (74%). When stratified by facility type, mystery clients waited the longest at dispensaries and basic health centers (median wait time of 110 min) and the shortest wait times at primary and secondary care hospitals (median of 82.5 min). In the survey, women recalled waiting a median of 15 min at basic health centers, 20 min at dispensaries, and 30 min at hospitals. Common causes of long waits reported by mystery clients in qualitative data included late facility openings, late providers, or prioritization of other patients. More than half of mystery clients reported spending less than 5 min with providers (59%), compared to only 8% of women surveyed.

Conclusions: Triangulation of data between different sources can provide a more nuanced understanding of long wait times, their causes, and how they impact contraceptive seekers. We find that in comparison, these different methods of data collection answer distinct questions about wait times, time spent with provider, and their impacts on contraceptive seekers. Both forms of data are useful to policy makers and stakeholders. We recommend data collection efforts aimed at improving quality of services and adherence to national guidelines consider supplementing standard data collection methods with mystery clients.

Keywords: Contraception; Mystery clients; Public facilities; Wait times.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declarations. Ethics approval and consent to participate: Ethical review and approval for this study was provided by The Maseno University Ethics Review Committee (Reference number: MSU/DRP/MUERC/01054/22) in Kisumu, Kenya and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (Study number: 21-2217). As our study involved data collection with human subjects, our study adhered to the Declaration of Helsinki. For the women’s questionnaire, informed consent was obtained by trained female enumerators after they explained the study and before they administered the structured questionnaire. For the mystery clients, informed consent was not obtained from individual providers to avoid alerting providers to the data collection activities, but consent was obtained from the facility directors. The county Department of Health granted permission to access health facilities and conduct this research. Consent for publication: Not applicable. Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests.

Similar articles

References

    1. World Health Organization. Ensuring human rights in the provision of contraceptive information and services: guidance and recommendations. Geneva: World Health Organization. 2014. https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/102539. Accessed 26 Nov 2021. - PubMed
    1. Shelton JD, Angle MA, Jacobstein RA. Medical barriers to access to family planning. Lancet. 1992;340:1334–5. - PubMed
    1. Tumlinson K, Gichane MW, Curtis SL, et al. Understanding healthcare provider absenteeism in Kenya: a qualitative analysis. BMC Health Serv Res. 2019;19:1–8. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Williams CR, Britton LE, Bullington BW, et al. Frequency and impact of long wait times for family planning in public-sector healthcare facilities in Western Kenya. Glob Health Action. 2022;15:2128305. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Solo J, Festin M. Provider Bias in family planning services: A review of its meaning and manifestations. Global Health: Sci Pract. 2019;7:371–85. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources