| Literature DB >> 27549156 |
Rocco Panciera1, Akib Khan2, Syed Jafar Raza Rizvi3, Shakil Ahmed3, Tanvir Ahmed3,4, Rubana Islam3, Alayne M Adams3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Availability of Emergency Obstetric Care (EmOC) is crucial to avert maternal death due to life-threatening complications potentially arising during delivery. Research on the determinants of utilization of EmOC has neglected urban settings, where traffic congestion can pose a significant barrier to the access of EmOC facilities, particularly for the urban poor due to costly and limited transportation options. This study investigates the impact of travel time to EmOC facilities on the utilization of facility-based delivery services among mothers living in urban poor settlements in Sylhet, Bangladesh.Entities:
Keywords: Emergency obstetric care; GIS; Health seeking; Travel time; Urban
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27549156 PMCID: PMC4994156 DOI: 10.1186/s12884-016-1032-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Pregnancy Childbirth ISSN: 1471-2393 Impact factor: 3.007
Fig. 1Conceptual framework of the determinants of facility delivery (Adapted from Gabrysch and Campbell, [11]). (label) Variables used in the analysis are indicated in italic font. Variable type is indicated as (c) for continuous and (d) for dichotomous variables
Fig. 2Spatial distribution of EmOC facilities and sampling clusters in Sylhet City Corporation. (label) Different panels show all facility types (panel a) and individually NGO (b), public (c) and private facilities (d). The size of the clusters reflects the ratio of facility deliveries to total deliveries for each cluster (in %). The shortest travel time calculated along the road network is shown as background. Statistics for the Global Bivariate Moran’s I index shown are calculated between the percentage of facility deliveries aggregated at cluster level and the network travel time calculated at the cluster center
Fig. 3Effect of travel time on utilization of EmOC facilities. (label) (a) Histograms of network travel times between the 39 sampling clusters and 19 EmOC facilities and; (b) Variation of % facility delivery by travel time brackets, shown for different facility types
Socio-cultural and economic characteristics of women by form of delivery in the last 6 months
| Variables [units] | All deliveriesa | Home deliveriesa | Facility deliveriesa | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Any type | Public | NGO | Private | |||
| Travel time [min] | ||||||
| To nearest public facility | 15.6 | 16.4 |
|
| 16.5 |
|
| To nearest NGO facility | 15.0 | 15.6 |
| 14.5 |
| 14.5 |
| To nearest private facility | 11.0 | 11.6 |
| 10.8 | 10.7 |
|
| Sociocultural factors | ||||||
| Age [years] | 24.9 (15–45)b | 24.9 | 24.8 | 25.4 | 24.1 | 25.4 |
| Age at first birth [years] | 19.4 (12–35)b | 18.7 |
|
| 19.3 |
|
| Religion [%] | 83.7 | 90.5 |
|
|
|
|
| Mother’s education [%] | 68.3 | 57.0 |
|
|
|
|
| Perceived benefit/need | ||||||
| Access to media [%] | 85.0 | 81.9 |
| 87.1 | 87.4 |
|
| Pregnancy wanted [%] | 63.0 | 61.6 | 64.4 | 71.0 |
|
|
| Antenatal care use [%] | 82.2 | 72.0 |
|
|
|
|
| Birth order [#] | 2.3 (0–8)b | 2.5 |
|
| 2.1 |
|
| Previous stillbirth [%] | 9.5 | 8.8 | 11.0 | 8.6 | 11.5 | 12.7 |
| Economic accessibility | ||||||
| Per-capita income [1000BDT] | 2.3 (0.1–17)b | 1.9 |
|
|
|
|
| [US$] | 29.7 (0.8–215)b | 24.5 |
|
|
|
|
| Mother’s occupation [%] | 12.3 | 11.0 | 14.0 |
| 10.3 | 12.7 |
| Delivery Service Use | 56.5 | 43.5 | 17.2 | 16.1 | 10.2 | |
| Sample size: 514 mothers | ||||||
Bold text indicate values statistically significant to better than p < 0.1
* p < 0.1; ** p < 0.05; *** p < 0.01, ANalysis Of VAriance (ANOVA) p-values indicating whether the mean values for each delivery group are statistically different (higher or lower) relatively to the home delivery group
aAverage values of each respective variable in each delivery group
bFor numerical variables, the range of values in the sample is also indicated
Reference categories: Mother’s occupation - participated in wage employment in the 4 weeks previous to survey (1), 0 otherwise; Mother’s education - received any (1) or no (0) formal education in school or madrasa; Religion - Muslim (1), all other religions (0); Access to media - daily, weekly or infrequent access to at least one media channel (either newspaper, radio or television) (1), 0 otherwise; Antenatal care use - received at least one check-up during pregnancy (1), 0 otherwise; Previous still birth and pregnancy wanted - positive (1) or negative (0) answers
Binomial logistic regression of factors predicting delivery at EmOC facility
| Delivery at EmOC facility of any type | ||
|---|---|---|
| Odds ratio (95 % confidence intervals)c | ||
| Variables | Modela | Modelb |
| Travel time [z-score] |
|
|
| Age at first birth |
| |
| Religion |
| |
| Mother’s education |
| |
| Access to media | 1.233 (0.600–2.533) | |
| Desired pregnancy | 0.769 (0.466–1.271) | |
| Antenatal care use |
| |
| Birth order | 0.928 (0.743–1.159) | |
| Previous stillbirth |
| |
| Per-capita income | 1.110 (0.971–1.268) | |
| Mother’s occupation | 1.685 (0.862–3.296) | |
| Constant | 0.853 (0.704–1.034) | 0.008*** (0.001–0.064) |
| Observations | 540 | 514 |
| Pseudo R-squared | 0.0131 | 0.212 |
Model specifications
* p < 0.1; ** p < 0.05; *** p < 0.01. Bold text indicate values statistically significant at the 1 % level
aOnly travel time to the nearest EmOC facility as explanatory variable
bConfounding factors as additional explanatory variables
cUse of clustered standard errors did not affect the significance levels of the estimated coefficients
Differential (marginal) impact of travel time from multinomial logistic regression
| % Change in relative probability of delivery with a 5-min increase in travel timea | |
|---|---|
| Delivery at any facility | −30.0 |
| Public facility delivery | −28.2 |
| Private facility delivery | −32.9 |
| NGO facility delivery | −28.6 |
aEstimates derive from a statistically significant (at the 1 % level) odds ratio of travel time in the multinomial model, namely 0.655 (95 % CI: 0.529–0.811)
Multinomial logistic regression of delivery at a public, private or NGO facility (McFadden’s choice model)
| Type of delivery facility | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Public | Private | NGO | |
| Variables | Adjusted odds ratio (95 % Confident Interval)a | ||
| Age at first birth |
|
| 1.056 (0.953–1.170) |
| Religion |
|
|
|
| Mother’s education |
|
|
|
| Access to media | 1.275 (0.508–3.197) |
| 0.875 (0.351–2.182) |
| Desired pregnancy | 1.163 (0.576–2.348) | 0.706 (0.321–1.549) |
|
| Birth order | 0.924 (0.673–1.267) |
| 0.969 (0.695–1.350) |
| Previous stillbirth | 1.204 (0.465–3.113) |
| 1.837 (0.684–4.936) |
| Per-capita income |
| 1.114 (0.917–1.353) | 1.060 (0.900–1.248) |
| Mother’s occupation |
| 1.694 (0.554–5.182) | 1.028 (0.440–2.400) |
| Observations | 514 | ||
| Log Likelihood | −4594 | ||
* p < 0.1; ** p < 0.05; *** p < 0.01. Bold text indicate values statistically significant to p < 0.1
aUse of clustered standard errors did not affect the significance levels of the estimated coefficients