| Literature DB >> 26021564 |
Dorothy A Oluoch1, Nancy Mwangome2, Bryn Kemp3,4, Anna C Seale5,6, Angela Koech7, Aris T Papageorghiou8,9, James A Berkley10,11, Stephen H Kennedy12,13, Caroline O H Jones14,15.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Antenatal care early in pregnancy enables service providers to identify and manage risks to mother and fetus. In the global north, ultrasound scans are routinely offered in pregnancy to provide an accurate estimate of gestational age and identify potential problems. In sub-Saharan Africa, such services are rarely available and women often delay initiating antenatal care. This study describes the uptake and provision of antenatal care in a rural Kenyan hospital and explores how pregnant women and healthcare providers perceived the provision of ultrasound scanning, following its introduction in an international foetal growth study.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26021564 PMCID: PMC4446960 DOI: 10.1186/s12884-015-0565-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Pregnancy Childbirth ISSN: 1471-2393 Impact factor: 3.007
Fig. 1Data collection flow
Gestational age among women at first ANC visit, assessed by fundal height measured by hand
| Gestational age (weeks) measured by hand | Number of women observed at first booking n = 145 (%) | Number of women interviewed at first booking n = 31* (%) |
|---|---|---|
| <16 | 13 (9) | 12 (35) |
| 16-20 | 18 (12) | 11 (32) |
| 21-28 | 71 (49) | 8 (24) |
| 29-32 | 25 (17) | 0 (0) |
| >32 | 18 (12) | 0 (0) |
*(records missing for three women)
Mother’s perceptions of the benefits of ANC
| Benefits of ANC | Number of women n = 34 (%) | Number of women n = 25 (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Reassurance | Checking health of baby. | 33 (97) | 20 (80) |
| Confirming pregnancy. | 3 (9) | 1 (4) | |
| Protection | Safe-guarding health of mother and baby: testing and treating for example tetanus immunisation, malaria prevention. | 13 (38) | 2 (7) |
| Counselling | 7 (21) | 0 (0) |
Benefits and concerns of US Scan; women interviewed before US scan
| Mothers’ views of benefits and concerns before US scan | Number of women n = 34 (%) | |
|---|---|---|
| Benefits of USS | ||
| Reassurance | Knowledge of health of baby | 30 (88) |
| Seeing | 22 (64) | |
| Confirmation of pregnancy | 4 (12) | |
| Confirmation of gestational age | 13 (38) | |
| Information | Number of babies | 6 (18) |
| Sex determination | 1 (3) | |
| Concerns of USS | ||
| Harming the baby | The machine uses rays which could affect the baby | 5 (15) |
| Harming the mother | The machine used during the procedure could hurt the mother | 5 (15) |
| Uncertainty of outcome | Not being sure of state and condition of the baby and not knowing real reason for being asked to undergo US scan | 3 (9) |
Benefits and concerns of US Scan; women interviewed after scan or at subsequent ANC visit
| Mothers’ views of benefits and concerns after US scan | Number of women (%) N = 30 | Number of women (%) N = 25 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Benefits of US scan | |||
| Reassurance | Knowledge of health of baby | 30 (100) | 22 (88) |
| Seeing | 30 (100) | 18 (72) | |
| Confirmation of pregnancy | 4 (13) | 17 (68) | |
| Confirmation of gestational age | 22 (73) | 7 (28) | |
| Information | Number of babies | 1 (3) | 2 (8) |
| Sex determination | 2 (7) | 1 (4) | |
| Concerns of US scan | |||
| Harming the baby | The machine uses rays which could affect the baby | 0 (0) | 2 (8) |
| Harming the mother | The machine used during the procedure could hurt the mother | 0 (0) | 1 (4) |
| Uncertainty of outcome | Not being sure of state and condition of the baby: implications of low lying placenta | 3 (10) | 1 (4) |