Table 2 Multivariate logistic regression analysis of factors associated with access to condom and source of condom
Variable | Access to condom | source of condom | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
(n = 5304) | Model I (aOR) | 95% CI | Model II (aOR) | 95% CI |
Age group | ||||
 15–24 | RC | RC | ||
 25–34 | 0.91 | 0.70–1.19 | 0.48** | 0.27–0.83 |
 35–45 | 0.97 | 0.74–1.28 | 0.57 | 0.32–1.03 |
Population group | ||||
 African/Black | RC | RC | ||
 Coloured | 0.85 | 0.49–1.45 | 0.98 | 0.36–2.73 |
 Others | 0.37** | 0.19–0.74 | 0.04*** | 0.01–0.11 |
Gender | ||||
 Male | RC | RC | ||
 Female | 1.15 | 0.94–1.40 | 1.27 | 0.80–2.03 |
Province | ||||
 Western Cape | RC | RC | ||
 Eastern Cape | 0.83 | 0.46–1.50 | 0.93 | 0.25–3.43 |
 Northern Cape | 1.31 | 0.65–2.64 | 0.34 | 0.08–1.61 |
 Free State | 1.63 | 0.89–2.99 | 1.14 | 0.34–3.79 |
 KwaZulu-Natal | 2.90*** | 1.70–4.95 | 1.30 | 0.47–3.55 |
 North-West | 1.02 | 0.53–1.99 | 1.72 | 0.46–6.52 |
 Gauteng | 1.01 | 0.59–1.72 | 0.75 | 0.26–2.21 |
 Mpumalanga | 1.89* | 1.08–3.32 | 1.25 | 0.41–3.83 |
 Limpopo | 0.87 | 0.47–1.60 | 0.92 | 0.28–2.99 |
Dwelling Type | ||||
 A Flat House | RC | RC | ||
 Traditional House | 0.91 | 0.65–1.27 | 1.74 | 0.86–3.52 |
 Informal House & others | 0.95 | 0.70–1.28 | 1.02 | 0.52–2.02 |
Employment | ||||
 Unemployed | RC |  | RC |  |
 Employed | 1.15 | 0.91–1.44 | 0.66 | 0.41–1.00 |
Wealth quintile | ||||
 Lower quintile | RC | RC | ||
 2nd quintile | 0.99 | 0.71–1.36 | 2.97** | 1.31–6.71 |
 3rd quintile | 0.60* | 0.38–0.93 | 1.22 | 0.34–4.39 |
 4th quintile | 1.35 | 0.99–1.86 | 1.58 | 0.72–3.47 |
 Upper quintile | 0.90 | 0.67–1.21 | 0.39** | 0.24–0.66 |
Educational level | ||||
 No & Primary education | RC |  |  |  |
 Secondary education & above | 0.80 | 0.55–1.16 | 0.24** | 0.08–0.71 |