Margaret E Kruk1, Sabrina Hermosilla1, Elysia Larson1, Godfrey M Mbaruku2. 1. 600 West 168th Street, Room 606, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, NY 10032, United States of America . 2. Ifakara Health Institute, Dar es Salaam, United Republic of Tanzania .
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To measure the extent, determinants and results of bypassing local primary care clinics for childbirth among women in rural parts of the United Republic of Tanzania. METHODS:Women were selected in 2012 to complete a structured interview from a full census of all 30076 households in clinic catchment areas in Pwani region. Eligibility was limited to those who had delivered between 6 weeks and 1 year before the interview, were at least 15 years old and lived within the catchment areas. Demographic and delivery care information and opinions on the quality of obstetric care were collected through interviews. Clinic characteristics were collected from staff via questionnaires. Determinants of bypassing (i.e. delivery of the youngest child at a health centre or hospital without provider referral) were analysed using multivariate logistic regression. Bypasser and non-bypasser birth experiences were compared in bivariate analyses. FINDINGS: Of 3019 eligible women interviewed (93% response rate), 71.0% (2144) delivered in a health facility; 41.8% (794) were bypassers. Bypassing likelihood increased with primiparity (odds ratio, OR: 2.5; 95% confidence interval, CI: 1.9-3.3) and perceived poor quality at clinics (OR: 1.3; 95% CI: 1.0-1.7) and decreased if clinics recently underwent renovations (OR: 0.39; 95% CI: 0.18-0.84) and/or performed ≥ 4 obstetric signal functions (OR: 0.19; 95% CI: 0.08-0.41). Bypassers reported better quality of care on six of seven quality of care measures. CONCLUSION:Many pregnant women, especially first-time mothers, choose to bypass local primary care clinics for childbirth. Perceived poor quality of care at clinics was an important reason for bypassing. Primary care is failing to meet the obstetric needs of many women in this rural, low-income setting.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To measure the extent, determinants and results of bypassing local primary care clinics for childbirth among women in rural parts of the United Republic of Tanzania. METHODS:Women were selected in 2012 to complete a structured interview from a full census of all 30076 households in clinic catchment areas in Pwani region. Eligibility was limited to those who had delivered between 6 weeks and 1 year before the interview, were at least 15 years old and lived within the catchment areas. Demographic and delivery care information and opinions on the quality of obstetric care were collected through interviews. Clinic characteristics were collected from staff via questionnaires. Determinants of bypassing (i.e. delivery of the youngest child at a health centre or hospital without provider referral) were analysed using multivariate logistic regression. Bypasser and non-bypasser birth experiences were compared in bivariate analyses. FINDINGS: Of 3019 eligible women interviewed (93% response rate), 71.0% (2144) delivered in a health facility; 41.8% (794) were bypassers. Bypassing likelihood increased with primiparity (odds ratio, OR: 2.5; 95% confidence interval, CI: 1.9-3.3) and perceived poor quality at clinics (OR: 1.3; 95% CI: 1.0-1.7) and decreased if clinics recently underwent renovations (OR: 0.39; 95% CI: 0.18-0.84) and/or performed ≥ 4 obstetric signal functions (OR: 0.19; 95% CI: 0.08-0.41). Bypassers reported better quality of care on six of seven quality of care measures. CONCLUSION: Many pregnant women, especially first-time mothers, choose to bypass local primary care clinics for childbirth. Perceived poor quality of care at clinics was an important reason for bypassing. Primary care is failing to meet the obstetric needs of many women in this rural, low-income setting.
Authors: A Q Yaffee; L K Whiteside; R A Oteng; P M Carter; P Donkor; S D Rominski; M E Kruk; R M Cunningham Journal: Trop Med Int Health Date: 2012-04-23 Impact factor: 2.622
Authors: Margaret E Kruk; Sabrina Hermosilla; Elysia Larson; Daniel Vail; Qixuan Chen; Festo Mazuguni; Beatrice Byalugaba; Godfrey Mbaruku Journal: Trop Med Int Health Date: 2015-04-30 Impact factor: 2.622
Authors: Charles N Mock; Peter Donkor; Atul Gawande; Dean T Jamison; Margaret E Kruk; Haile T Debas Journal: Lancet Date: 2015-02-05 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Margaret E Kruk; Anna D Gage; Catherine Arsenault; Keely Jordan; Hannah H Leslie; Sanam Roder-DeWan; Olusoji Adeyi; Pierre Barker; Bernadette Daelmans; Svetlana V Doubova; Mike English; Ezequiel García-Elorrio; Frederico Guanais; Oye Gureje; Lisa R Hirschhorn; Lixin Jiang; Edward Kelley; Ephrem Tekle Lemango; Jerker Liljestrand; Address Malata; Tanya Marchant; Malebona Precious Matsoso; John G Meara; Manoj Mohanan; Youssoupha Ndiaye; Ole F Norheim; K Srinath Reddy; Alexander K Rowe; Joshua A Salomon; Gagan Thapa; Nana A Y Twum-Danso; Muhammad Pate Journal: Lancet Glob Health Date: 2018-09-05 Impact factor: 26.763
Authors: Katharine D Shelley; Rose Mpembeni; Gasto Frumence; Elizabeth A Stuart; Japhet Killewo; Abdullah H Baqui; David H Peters Journal: Matern Child Health J Date: 2019-10
Authors: Christine Mutaganzwa; Leah Wibecan; Hari S Iyer; Evrard Nahimana; Anatole Manzi; Francois Biziyaremye; Merab Nyishime; Fulgence Nkikabahizi; Lisa R Hirschhorn; Hema Magge Journal: Int J Qual Health Care Date: 2018-12-01 Impact factor: 2.038
Authors: Elysia Larson; Daniel Vail; Godfrey M Mbaruku; Redempta Mbatia; Margaret E Kruk Journal: Int J Qual Health Care Date: 2017-02-01 Impact factor: 2.038