INTRODUCTION:

The 1st recorded vasectomy was performed on a dog by Cooper in 1823. R. Harrison of London performed the 1st human vasectomy, not for sterilization purposes, but to bring about atrophy of the prostate. During the Second World War, vasectomy was finally regarded as a method of birth control. The 1st vasectomy programme on a national scale was launched in 1954 in India. In 1976, a huge government campaign for sterilization was launched and was responsible for the sterilization of millions of Indian couples. It appears that vasectomy, with its low cost, simplicity of technique, and measurable successes in the laboratory, would become even more popular than tubal ligation.

The first use of vasectomy (1899) was on a 19 year male who had complained of excessive masturbation. The surgery was carried out by a physician by name Harry Sharp. Following the surgery, the patient is reported to have acquired a higher intellectual level in addition to reduced masturbation.

Between 1904 and 1907, vasectomy (both as left and right or bilateral) was used to reduce the chances of infection of the epididymis following prostate surgery. The infamous case where a patient murdered a surgeon, for castration as birth control measure, prompted surgeons to look for another alternative for castration and very soon, vasectomy began to assume an important role. Infact, vasectomy was made compulsory of any confirmed idiot, rapist or a criminal. This led to the flourishment of the concept of eugenics where individuals who were considered as being unimportant to the society were vasectomised, so ensure that the future generations were healthy.

NEED OF THE STUDY:

Permanent methods such as vasectomy are not appropriate for everyone. They are uniquely suitable, however, when couples no longer want more children. When vasectomy is available, it is the choice of some couples who want no more children. Many men are interested in family planning. Many want to take responsibility for family planning or share the responsibility with their partners. Vasectomy offers that opportunity. It offers men a contraceptive method that is far more effective and convenient than condoms or withdrawal (although condoms remain the only family planning method that can prevent sexually transmitted infections (STIs), including HIV/AIDS). Making vasectomy available along with female sterilization also encourages couples who want no more children to decide together on what method to use.

Vasectomy is the most effective permanent form of birth control available to men. In nearly every way that vasectomy can be compared to tubal ligation, it is/has a more positive outlook. Vasectomy is more cost effective, less invasive, has techniques that are emerging that may facilitate easier reversal, and has a much lower risk of post-operative complications.

Vasectomy is one of the most cost-effective contraceptive method. The one-time procedure continues to protect against pregnancy throughout a couple’s reproductive years. Within several years, vasectomy becomes more economical than other methods—particularly methods that require continuous supplies, such as pills or condoms. An analysis in Iran produced similar results: When all programme costs were considered, vasectomy was the cheapest method, on average, per year of contraceptive protection.

While, there has been a perceptible shift in focus on male sterilisation in recent years in a number of Indian states, vasectomy rates remain extremely low in Uttar Pradesh—the prevalence of vasectomy use is just 0.2%, one-quarter of the national average prevalence of 0.8%.

“Despite vasectomy being a safe, simple and effective contraceptive option for men who have completed their families, there are still a number of misconceptions surrounding the procedure. Despite these misconceptions, it is promising that 94% of men would go to their GP to source information on the procedure” said Ms Michelson.

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM:

A descriptive study to assess knowledge and attitude on vasectomy among husbands of postnatal mothers in a view to develop pamphlet in Dr. Bhimrao Ambedkar Memorial Hospital at Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY:

1. To assess the knowledge on vasectomy among husbands of postnatal mothers.

2. To determine the attitude regarding vasectomy among husbands of postnatal mothers.

3. To develop pamphlet on vasectomy.

4. To seek the relationship between knowledge and attitude on vasectomy among husbands of postnatal mothers.

5. To analyze the association between knowledge and attitude of husbands of postnatal mothers regarding vasectomy with selected socio-demographic variables.

HYPOTHESIS:

Level of significance at 0.05 level

H1. Significant relationship will be there between knowledge and attitude of husbands of postnatal mothers regarding vasectomy as evident from their knowledge and attitude score at 0.05 level of significance.

H01. Significant relationship will not be there between knowledge and attitude of husbands of postnatal mothers regarding vasectomy as evident from their knowledge and attitude score at 0.05 level of significance.

H2. Significant association will be there between knowledge and attitude of husbands of postnatal mothers with selected socio- demographic variables as evident from their knowledge and attitude score at 0.05 level of significance.

H02. Significant association will not be there between knowledge and attitude of husbands of postnatal mothers with selected socio demographic variables as evident from their knowledge and attitude score at 0.05 level of significance.

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK:

This study is based on Health Promotion Model (HPM) proposed by Nola J. Pender (1982; revised, 1996) was designed to be a “complementary counterpart to models of health protection”. It defines health as "a positive dynamic state not merely the absence of disease". Health promotion is directed at increasing a client’s level of well being. The health promotion model describes the multi-dimensional nature of persons as they interact within their environment to pursue health.

The model focuses on following three areas:

o Individual characteristics and experiences.

o Behavior-specific cognitions and affect.

o Behavioral outcomes

METHODOLOGY:

RESEARCH APPROACH

Quantitative approaches to design are appropriate when the purpose of the study is to understand the meaning of phenomena.

RESEARCH DESIGN

The research design selected for the present study is quantitative research design that is descriptive research design

VARIABLES

The categories of variables discussed in the present study were.

INDEPENDENT VARIABLES: Age, educational status, occupation, income, religion, type of family, number of living children, living area.

DEPENDENTS VARIABLES: Knowledge and attitude towards vasectomy.

EXTRANEOUS VARIABLES: Presence of wife and other family members.

SAMPLING TECHNIQUE

In the present study purposive sampling technique was used to select subjects as they fulfill the inclusion criteria, purposive sampling uses participants who are easily accessible to the researcher and who meet the criteria of the study, it entails the use of the most readily available infants or objects, as subjects in the study.

SAMPLE SIZE

In the present study sample size is 100 husbands who are available in postnatal wards with their postnatal wives.

MAJOR FINDINGS:

The data collected was analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics where the mean score of knowledge was (X = 9.55), Median value was 9.5 and standard deviation of knowledge score was (SD = 5.03). The calculation of attitude founded that the mean score was (X = 73.21), Median was 69.5 and standard deviation of attitude score was (SD = 25.83). The findings of “r” co-relation of co- efficient value between knowledge and attitude of husbands of post-natal mother regarding vasectomy reveals that the there will be positive co-relation as “r” value found 0.399 which was significant at 0.05 level. In findings of association done by calculating chi-square analysis which reveals no association between knowledge and attitude of husbands of postnatal mothers with socio-demographic variables. So the research hypothesis (H1) is accepted and null hypothesis (Ho1) is rejected and on the other hand the research hypothesis (H2) is rejected and null hypothesis (Ho2) is accepted.

CONCLUSION:

On the basis of the findings of the study, the following conclusion could be drawn:-

1. There was below average level of knowledge among the husbands of postnatal mothers regarding vasectomy.

2. Major portion of the samples was having negative attitude towards Vasectomy.

3. There was significant positive correlation between knowledge and attitude on vasectomy among the husbands of postnatal mothers.

4. There was no significant association between knowledge and attitude of husbands with selected socio-demographic variables.

Hence it can be concluded that level of knowledge is below average and attitude is negative among the husbands of postnatal mothers regarding vasectomy.

IMPLICATION:

The findings of the study have implication in various areas of nursing practice, nursing education, nursing administration and nursing research to promote health.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

¨ A similar study can be undertaken with a large sample size to create awareness on vasectomy among the male partners related to various aspects of birth control methods.

¨ The present study can be replicated on a large sample with interventional and survey design.

¨ A comparative study can be done to assess the knowledge of family and society about male sterilization methods.

REFERENCES:

1. Balaiah, D., D.D. Naik, R.C. Parida. Contraceptive knowledge, attitude and practices of men in rural Maharashtra. Advances in Contraception. 1999 Oct; 15 (4) : 217-34.

2. Park K. Park’s Text Book of Preventive and Social Medicine. Jabalpur: Bhanot Publication; 2007.

3. C A Huether, S Howe et. al. Knowledge, attitudes, and practice regarding vasectomy among residents of Hamilton County, Ohio, 1980. (Internet). 1984 (updated 2010 Sep 4; cited 2009 Aug 25). Available from:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1651369/

Received on 12.06.2016 Modified on 25.06.2016

Int. J. Adv. Nur. Management. 2016; 4(2): 102-104.

DOI: 10.5958/2454-2652.2016.00022.6