| Literature DB >> 26049737 |
Stephen M Kibusi1, Eunice Kimunai2, Courtney S Hines3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Tanzania adopted Intermittent-preventive treatment of malaria in pregnancy (IPTp) policy in 2000; the guidelines at the time of the study recommended the timing of the first dose of intermittent preventive treatment in pregnancy (IPTp) with sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (SP) (IPTp-SP) at 20-24 weeks and the timing of the second dose at 28-32 weeks. The aim of this study was to identify factors that are responsible for the uptake of IPTp among pregnant Tanzanian women. Further, this study aims to justify the need for appropriate interventions that would strengthen the Tanzanian IPTp program towards the realization of the Roll Back Malaria (RBM) targets.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26049737 PMCID: PMC4458339 DOI: 10.1186/s12889-015-1905-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Public Health ISSN: 1471-2458 Impact factor: 3.295
Fig. 1Sample selection
The distribution of participants by socio-demographic characteristics and uptake of IPTp
| Variables | % of women who took IPTp |
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| <2 doses | 2+ doses | ||||
| n | % | n | % | ||
| Education | |||||
| No education | 233 | 75.2 | 77 | 24.8 | |
| Primary inco | 127 | 68.3 | 59 | 31.7 | *** |
| Primary comp. | 599 | 64.5 | 330 | 35.5 | |
| Secondary+ | 104 | 54.7 | 86 | 45.3 | |
| Age groups | |||||
| 15–19 | 157 | 74.4 | 54 | 25.6 | |
| 20–24 | 294 | 68.5 | 135 | 31.5 | |
| 25–29 | 263 | 66.1 | 135 | 33.9 | ** |
| 30–34 | 164 | 60.1 | 109 | 39.9 | |
| 35–39 | 127 | 57.7 | 93 | 42.3 | |
| 40–44 | 52 | 70.3 | 22 | 29.7 | |
| 45–49 | 7 | 63.6 | 4 | 36.4 | |
| Occupation | |||||
| Unemployed | 127 | 58.3 | 91 | 41.7 | |
| Self employed | 748 | 69.6 | 327 | 30.4 | *** |
| Employed | 187 | 58.3 | 134 | 41.7 | |
| Marital Status | |||||
| Never married | 90 | 62.5 | 54 | 37.5 | |
| Divorced/Separated | 80 | 72.1 | 31 | 27.9 | |
| Married | 893 | 65.6 | 468 | 34.4 | |
Here *, ** and *** indicate p < 0.05, p < 0.01 and p < 0.001 respectively. N = 1616. Participants missing some information on independent variables: 2 on occupation
Distribution of participants by uptake of IPTp and the potential factors affecting uptake (Chi-Square)
| Variable | % of women who took IPTp |
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| <2 doses | 2+ doses | ||||
| n | % | n | % | ||
| Wealth Index | |||||
| Poorest | 212 | 72.4 | 81 | 27.6 | |
| Poorer | 249 | 66.4 | 126 | 33.6 | |
| Middle | 233 | 71.7 | 92 | 28.3 | *** |
| Richer | 223 | 68.0 | 105 | 32.0 | |
| Richest | 146 | 49.8 | 147 | 50.2 | |
| Zones | |||||
| Eastern | 99 | 44.8 | 122 | 55.2 | *** |
| Western | 97 | 67.4 | 47 | 32.6 | |
| Southern | 34 | 57.6 | 25 | 42.4 | |
| S Highlands | 99 | 57.6 | 73 | 42.4 | |
| SW Highlands | 108 | 70.1 | 46 | 29.9 | |
| Central | 106 | 69.3 | 47 | 30.7 | |
| Northern | 74 | 59.2 | 51 | 40.8 | |
| Lake | 411 | 77.3 | 121 | 22.7 | |
| Zanzibar | 36 | 64.3 | 20 | 35.7 | |
| Parity | |||||
| No child | 11 | 42.3 | 15 | 57.7 | |
| One child | 315 | 58.9 | 220 | 41.1 | *** |
| Two Children | 397 | 65.3 | 211 | 34.7 | |
| 3+ Children | 340 | 76.4 | 105 | 23.6 | |
| 1st ANC Visit | *** | ||||
| 1st trimester | 149 | 55.8 | 118 | 44.2 | |
| 2nd trimester | 733 | 65.1 | 393 | 34.9 | |
| 3rd trimester | 182 | 81.6 | 41 | 18.4 | |
| Ever heard about IPTp | |||||
| Yes | 555 | 60.0 | 370 | 40.0 | |
| No | 508 | 73.5 | 183 | 26.5 | *** |
| Dose Source | |||||
| Antenatal visit | 498 | 50.3 | 492 | 49.7 | *** |
| Other source | 566 | 90.4 | 60 | 9.6 | |
Here *, ** and *** indicate p < 0.05, p < 0.01 and p < 0.001 respectively. N = 1616. Participants missing some information on independent variables: 2 on wealth & 2 on parity
Adjusted Odds Ratios (AOR) for factors associated with uptake of IPTp among women who attended ANC services and had a live birth 2 years before the survey (N = 1616)
| Variable | AOR | 95 % CI | P value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age groups | |||
| 15–19 | 1 | ||
| 20–24 | 1.28 | 0.83–1.98 | |
| 25–29 | 1.38 | 0.88–2.16 | |
| 30–34 | 1.88 | 1.16–6.05 | ** |
| 35–39 | 2.25 | 1.36–3.64 | *** |
| 40–44 | 1.17 | 0.60–2.29 | |
| 45–49 | 1.69 | 0.37–7.64 | |
| Marital Status | |||
| Married | 1 | ||
| Never married | 1.29 | 0.08–2.08 | |
| Divorced/Separated | 0.61 | 0.37–1.01 | * |
| Zones | |||
| Eastern | 1 | ||
| Western | 0.82 | 0.49–1.38 | *** |
| Southern | 0.63 | 0.32–1.22 | ** |
| Southern Highlands | 0.81 | 0.50–1.31 | |
| Southern West Highlands | 0.44 | 0.27–0.73 | |
| Central | 0.51 | 0.30–0.85 | |
| Northern | 0.68 | 0.41–1.13 | |
| Lake | 0.54 | 0.35–0.83 | ** |
| Zanzibar | 0.46 | 0.23–0.93 | * |
| Parity | |||
| Three or more Children No child | 1 | ||
| One child | 3.08 | 1.21–7.83 | * |
| Two Children | 1.42 | 1.00–2.02 | * |
| 1.10 | 0.80–1.51 | ||
| Timing of 1st ANC Visit: | |||
| 3rd trimester | 1 | ||
| 1st trimester | 1.99 | 1.24–3.21 | ** |
| 2nd trimester | 1.94 | 1.29–2.90 | *** |
Here *, ** and *** indicate p < 0.05, p < 0.01 and p < 0.001 respectively