| Literature DB >> 23690921 |
Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND RATIONALE: Number of demographically laggard countries will forego MDGs 4 and 5, and Nepal is not an exception to it. International reports reveal that, lack of adequate birth preparedness is one of the greatest hurdles in achievement of MDG 4 and 5. However, lack of comprehensive evidence at country level in developing countries like Nepal is a hindrance for policy making. In this context, this study estimated birth preparedness among Nepali women and its association with institutional delivery and postnatal care in Nepal. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDING: Secondary data such as latest round of Nepal Demographic and Health Survey Data (NDHS, 2011) has been used in the study. Bivariate and multivariate models are applied as the methods of data analyses. Results reveals that only 32 per cent of women in Nepal have birth preparedness. The women who are well prepared belong to higher age group (45%), higher education (36%) and with higher women autonomy (86%). Women, who are well prepared for child birth (OR = 3.137, p<0.01) have a greater likelihood of going for institutional deliveries that women with no preparation (OR = 1). However, irrespective of level of birth preparedness, women in Nepal preferred to deliver the baby in public health facility that private health Facility. CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS: Findings reveal that birth preparedness is one of the critical factors in determining the likelihood of having institutional delivery and checkups after delivery. At policy perspective, this study fosters that developing countries like Nepal have to ensure adequate and universal birth preparedness in order to achieve goal 4 and 5 of MDGs.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23690921 PMCID: PMC3655026 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0060957
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1Percentage distribution of women by arrangement (Yes/No) of different birth preparedness tools, Nepal, 2011.
Figure 2Composition of women by birth preparedness levels in Nepal, 2011.
Levels of Birth Preparedness by background characteristics, Nepal, 2011.
| Background Characteristics of women | Birth Preparedness | N | |||
| Poor Preparation | Moderate Prepared | Well Prepared | Chi- Square | ||
|
| |||||
| Yes | 32.20 | 33.10 | 34.60 | 1.35* | 524 |
| No | 30.00 | 30.00 | 40.00 | 106 | |
|
| |||||
| 15–24 | 40.90 | 33.00 | 26.10 | 14.37*** | 284 |
| 25–34 | 31.90 | 35.10 | 33.00 | 483 | |
| 35+ | 24.00 | 30.80 | 45.20 | 85 | |
|
| |||||
| Mountain | 46.00 | 32.00 | 22.00 | 10.44** | 127 |
| Hill | 31.00 | 35.90 | 33.10 | 298 | |
| Terni | 34.30 | 33.20 | 32.50 | 427 | |
|
| |||||
| Rural | 37.7 | 31.9 | 30.5 | 4.82* | 571 |
| Urban | 30.6 | 38.1 | 31.3 | 281 | |
|
| |||||
| No education | 38.20 | 34.50 | 27.30 | 4.15 | 318 |
| Primary and Secondary | 32.60 | 32.10 | 35.20 | 409 | |
| Higher | 24.80 | 38.80 | 36.40 | 125 | |
|
| |||||
| Poorest | 27.6 | 35.5 | 36.8 | 28.70*** | 152 |
| Poorer | 35..4 | 37.2 | 27.4 | 164 | |
| Middle | 51.4 | 22.5 | 26.1 | 142 | |
| Richer | 36.7 | 30.9 | 32.4 | 188 | |
| Richest | 28.6 | 40.80 | 30.6 | 206 | |
|
| |||||
| Low | 100.00 | ** | ** | 1507.76*** | 301 |
| Medium | 100.0 | 253 | |||
| High | 14.20 | 85.80 | 298 | ||
Significance Levels- p<0.10*, p<0.05**, p<.01***.
Institutional delivery, type of health facility for delivery and related care by schemes of birth preparedness, Nepal, 2011.
| Birth preparedness tools | Institutional delivery | Type of health facility for delivery | Check up after delivery | N | |
| Private | Public | Yes | Total | ||
|
| |||||
| Yes | 55.60 | 74.80 | 25.20 | 61.20 | 1543 |
| No | 28.90 | 72.50 | 27.50 | 38.80 | 2534 |
|
| |||||
| Yes | 83.70 | 70.90 | 29.10 | 81.00 | 147 |
| No | 36.90 | 73.90 | 26.10 | 19.00 | 3930 |
|
| |||||
| Yes | 84.20 | 56.20 | 43.80 | 78.30 | 23 |
| No | 38.30 | 73.90 | 26.10 | 21.70 | 4054 |
|
| |||||
| Yes | 51.40 | 75.70 | 24.30 | 74.60 | 71 |
| No | 38.20 | 73.60 | 26.40 | 25.40 | 4006 |
|
| |||||
| Yes | 21.50 | 77.50 | 22.50 | 43.90 | 212 |
| No | 39.30 | 73.60 | 26.40 | 56.10 | 4006 |
|
| |||||
| Yes | 37.90 | 74.20 | 25.80 | 43.20 | 1939 |
| No | 38.90 | 73.40 | 26.60 | 56.80 | 2138 |
|
| |||||
| Yes | 50.10 | 73.90 | 26.10 | 55.30 | 1663 |
| No | 31.20 | 73.60 | 26.40 | 44.70 | 2414 |
|
| |||||
| Yes | 31.10 | 85.70 | 14.30 | 38.10 | 63 |
| No | 38.60 | 73.50 | 26.50 | 61.90 | 4014 |
|
| |||||
| No preparation | 28.50 | 7.20 | 21.3 | 32.50 | 1300 |
| Poor | 42.40 | 12.3 | 30.00 | 53.80 | 237 |
| Moderate | 46.80 | 11.3 | 35.30 | 55.50 | 231 |
| Well | 51.80 | 8.60 | 40.50 | 60.20 | 204 |
Odds ratios showing the relationship of birth preparedness on institutional delivery and other background characteristic - Result of logistic analysis.
| Factors | Exp(B) | 95% C.I. for EXP(B) | |
| Lower | Upper | ||
|
| |||
| No Preparation | 1.00 | ||
| Poor Preparation | 2.185*** | 1.648 | 2.898 |
| Moderate prepared | 2.752*** | 2.069 | 3.662 |
| Well prepared | 3.133*** | 2.318 | 4.234 |
|
| |||
| 15–24 | 1.00 | ||
| 25–34 | 0.618** | 0.429 | 0.892 |
| 35+ | 0.603* | 0.32 | 1.134 |
|
| |||
| Urban | 1.00 | ||
| Rural | 1.026 | 0.614 | 1.713 |
|
| |||
| Mountain | 1.00 | ||
| Hill | 0.808* | 0.495 | 1.321 |
| Terai | 0.512*** | 0.351 | 0.747 |
|
| |||
| No education | 1.00 | ||
| Primary & Secondary | 1.899 | 1.294 | 2.786 |
| Higher education | 5.178* | 2.763 | 9.705 |
|
| |||
| Poorest | 1.00 | ||
| Poorer | 1.223** | 0.699 | 2.138 |
| Middle | 1.541*** | 0.869 | 2.731 |
| Richer | 4.314*** | 2.529 | 7.358 |
| Richest | 11.327*** | 6.059 | 21.177 |
|
| |||
| Low | 1.00 | ||
| Medium | 1.298 | 0.927 | 1.816 |
| High | 1.351* | 0.979 | 1.864 |
|
| 0.414** | ||
Significance levels- p<0.10*, p<0.05**, p<.01***.
Odds ratios showing the relationship of birth preparedness on check up after delivery and other background characteristic - Result of logistic analysis.
| Factors | Exp(B) | 95% C.I. for EXP(B) | |
| Lower | Upper | ||
|
| |||
| No Preparation | |||
| Poor Preparation | 2.409*** | 1.747 | 3.323 |
| Moderate prepared | 2.562*** | 1.876 | 3.5 |
| Well prepared | 3.137*** | 2.302 | 4.274 |
|
| |||
| 15–24 | |||
| 25–34 | 0.816 | 0.558 | 1.192 |
| 35+ | 0.911 | 0.49 | 1.697 |
|
| |||
| Urban | |||
| Rural | 0.618** | 0.419 | 0.911 |
|
| |||
| Mountain | |||
| Hill | 1.083 | 0.636 | 1.846 |
| Terai | 0.921 | 0.554 | 1.533 |
|
| |||
| No education | |||
| Primary & Secondary | 1.712*** | 1.146 | 2.556 |
| Higher education | 5.324*** | 2.7 | 10.499 |
|
| |||
| Poorest | |||
| Poorer | 1.12 | 0.643 | 1.95 |
| Middle | 1.321 | 0.732 | 2.353 |
| Richer | 3.049*** | 1.745 | 5.326 |
| Richest | 4.882*** | 2.609 | 9.135 |
|
| |||
| Low | |||
| Medium | 1.507 | 0.555 | 4.095 |
| High | 1.233 | 0.813 | 1.87 |
|
| 0.396*** | ||
Significance levels- p<0.10*, p<0.05**, p<.01***.