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
Review
. 2025 Nov 1;406(10515):2168-2190.
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(25)01246-2.

Challenges and opportunities in developing integrated sexual and reproductive health programmes

Affiliations
Review

Challenges and opportunities in developing integrated sexual and reproductive health programmes

Kenneth H Mayer et al. Lancet. .

Abstract

Sexual and reproductive health and rights are fundamental to both human and societal wellbeing and sustainable development, and encompass a broad array of sociocultural and clinical issues that affect all people across the life course. In 2018, the Guttmacher-Lancet Commission described sexual and reproductive health as a state of physical, emotional, mental, and social wellbeing in relation to all aspects of sexuality and reproduction, not merely the absence of disease, dysfunction, or infirmity. The Commission advocated for a positive approach to sexuality and reproduction that recognises the role of pleasurable sexual relationships, trust, and communication in promoting self-esteem and overall wellbeing. The Commission also stipulated that people have a right to make decisions governing their bodies and to access services that support that right. In light of recent sociocultural changes, biomedical advances that have impacted sexual and reproductive health and rights, and the key findings of the Guttmacher-Lancet Commission, we bring together themes from this Lancet Series to discuss the new scientific developments and sociopolitical changes that affect the programmatic integration of sexual and reproductive health services. As people who present for one sexual and reproductive health service frequently have other unmet sexual and reproductive health-related needs, there are often benefits to interventions and services that address multiple connected sexual and reproductive health issues during one clinical encounter (eg, family planning visits, including testing for HIV and other sexually transmitted infections), which supports the rationale for an integrated approach. Historically, key components of sexual and reproductive health have been managed separately, partly because of siloed and inadequate funding streams and structural limitations (eg, separate location of service delivery or insufficient staff cross-training). Vertical methods have also evolved from the need for different approaches to reach key populations, who might be reluctant to seek care from primary health care clinics. We build on the findings of the papers in this Series to discuss the rationale for sexual and reproductive health programmatic integration, which has the potential to better engage patients in care by meeting their preferences, simplify the user experience, and save resources when implemented in a thoughtful, culturally tailored manner. However, wide-scale sexual and reproductive health programmatic integration faces multiple challenges, requiring broadly trained health-care providers, a range of clinical and outreach channels, and well-resourced health systems. Programmatic integration might be further constrained by societal norms and regulations (eg, punitive laws, institutional homophobia, legal restrictions on access to safe abortion, and opposition to sexual and reproductive rights). Notably, the Trump Administration's withdrawal of support from various sexual and reproductive health programmes in January, 2025, is a major threat to continued progress. This Series paper provides a call to action based on the key findings from this Series that delineates the steps needed to better integrate programmes to optimise sexual and reproductive health outcomes.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declaration of interests KHM has received institutional research grants from Gilead, the US National Institutes of Health (NIH), the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Merck, GSK, Moderna, and ViiV Healthcare; has held a position as an advisory board member for Gilead Science, ViiV Healthcare and Merck; and has received payment and royalties from writing for Up-to-Date and McGraw-Hill. CB held a position as President of the International AIDS Society. MSC has received research grants from NIH; has received consulting fees from Aerium and Optko; has received honoraria from Medscape, UpToDate, AstraZeneca, and PeerReview Institute; has received financial support from GSK; and has held a position as co-chair of HIV Prevention Trials Networks and COVID-19 Vaccine Trials Network. JMH has received financial support and consulting fees from the Fenway Institute. ASK has received US Government grants from Health Resources and Services Administration's Bureau of Primary Health Care and their HIV/AIDS Bureau; has received royalties from McGraw Hill Education and American Psychiatric Association; and has received consulting fees from HRSA, University of Washington, University of California San Francisco, and Alpert School of Medicine at Brown. VM has received institutional grants from the Gates Foundation, Merck, Gilead and ViiV Healthcare. NP has received institutional grants from Gilead Sciences, USAID, ViiV Healthcare, The Global Fund to fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria, and NIH; has received consulting fees from ViiV Healthcare and Gilead Sciences; has received honoraria from Gilead Sciences and Abbott; and has received equipment from Cepheid. MR has received grants from the Gates Foundation; holds a position as Chair on the NIH Tuberculosis Advisory Board; holds a position as a board member of CUGH and Fogarty International Center at NIH; is funded by the US Government through a consultancy agreement to University of California San Francisco. AS has received consulting fees from Cambridge Economic Policy Associates and Global Health Visions. MW participated on the Gilead Sciences Data Monitoring Committee for PrEP and National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Disease Data and Safety Monitoring Board for HIV Vaccines; has served as Executive Director of AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition; has held a position as President of the Tuberculosis Alliance Stakeholder Association; has held a position as a board member of Tuberculosis Alliance; and has held a position as a Governing Council Member of International AIDS Society. LGB received honoraria from Gilead Sciences, ViiV Healthcare, and Merck. All other authors declare no competing interests.

MeSH terms