| Literature DB >> 27812124 |
Gizachew Assefa Tessema1,2, Judith Streak Gomersall1, Mohammad Afzal Mahmood1, Caroline O Laurence1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Improving use of family planning services is key to improving maternal health in Africa, and provision of quality of care in family planning services is critical to support higher levels of contraceptive uptake. The objective of this systematic review was to synthesize the available evidence on factors determining the quality of care in family planning services in Africa.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27812124 PMCID: PMC5094662 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0165627
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Characteristics of the quantitative studies included in the review.
| General article information | Quality score | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| First author, year of publication, and reference number | Aim(s) and study design | Country and year of study | Study Population and sample size | Data collection method(s) | Outcome measurement | Data analysis | Limitations identified by the author(s) | |
| Abdel-Tawab 2002[ | • Aims: to examine the feasibility, acceptability, and effectiveness of client-centred models in FP clinics | Egypt 1992 | • Female family planning client (n= 112) | Client exit interview, audiotaped data for provider-client interaction data, physician interview | • Client satisfaction was assessed by considering five proxy questions which were rated 0 to 10, with higher score indicating greater satisfaction. | Multivariate logistic regression analysis | No limitation information was provided | Moderate |
| Agha 2009[ | • Aim: to compare the quality of family planning services delivered at public and private facilities | Kenya 2004 | Health facilities (n= 323) and family planning clients (n= 628) in a subset of 172 facilities. | Facility inventory, observation, and client exit interviewing | Client satisfaction was assessed through proxy questions and those clients who responded ‘no problem’ to these questions were regarded as satisfied client and otherwise taken as not satisfied. | Multivariate logistic regression analysis | Sample for private facilities was smaller | Moderate |
| Hutchinson 2011[ | • Aim: to quantify the differences in the quality of family planning services at public and private providers in three countries | • Tanzania 2006 | • Tanzania: Health facilities (n=482), providers (n=1244), and clients (1005) | Data collected through facility survey, observation and client interview | Client satisfaction was measured in two ways. Responses were dichotomized as satisfied if there were ‘no problem’ in proxy questions related to client satisfaction. Additionally, they calculated index of satisfaction using principal component analysis and took as a continuous variable. Factors were identified using both measurements. | Both multivariate linear regression and multivariate logistic regression analysis conducted. The regression analysis were conducted for hospital and clinics separately. | Inability to distinguish between for-profit and not-for-profit private facilities | Moderate |
| Tafese 2013[ | • Aim: to assess the quality of family planning services in primary health care centres | Ethiopia 2011 | Family planning clients (n=301) mean age (SD)= 26(+5), range (15-45), 61.5% were from rural Health centres (n=5) | Exit-interview of women at facility, and observation of provider-client interactions | Client satisfaction measured through 10 proxy questions and the principal component analysis was used to create an aggregate measure of continuous variable. Each included proxy question was assessed using a 5-points Likert scale (0 to 5) | Multivariate linear regression | Hawthorne effect during provider observation, Courtesy bias during the exit interview and introduction of observer bias | High |
| Wang 2014[ | • Aim: to assess the quality of care at health facilities in providing family planning, antenatal care and sick child care | • Kenya 2010 | • Kenya: Health facilities (n=575), providers(n=1583), clients (n=1004) | In all the three countries, data were collected through facility inventory assessment, client exit interview, provider-client interaction observation, provider interview | Client satisfaction variable was rated as an index of problems encountered during the visit (none versus any). Client’s responses for these proxy questions were then aggregated into an index using principal components analysis | Multivariate linear regression | Observer bias and social desirability bias | Moderate |
| Assaf 2015[ | • Aim: to examine the quality of care in health facilities in Senegal, with a focus on family planning services | Senegal 2012/13and 2014 | • Two rounds | Data collections was made in two rounds. Facility inventory survey, observation of provider-client interaction, and providers interviewing were made in each survey periods | Client satisfaction was measured based on a general question about overall client satisfaction on the family planning services. The categories of the responses were very satisfied, more or less satisfied, and not satisfied. Finally they created a binary variable as very satisfied or not satisfied. | Multivariate logistic regression | Social desirability bias, client satisfaction maybe over-reported | Moderate |
| Argago 2015[ | • Aim: To assess client satisfactions with family planning services and associated factors | Ethiopia 2014 | • Family planning clients (n= 324) | Client exit interview was conducted | Client satisfaction score was calculated using 18 proxy questions and then binary variable was devised as low and high satisfaction. | Multivariate logistic regression | The study was solely based on client’s information. It did not include provider-client observation or a facility inventory assessment. | Moderate |
| Nasr 2016[ | • Aim: to assess the association between quality of family planning services and client satisfaction level | Egypt 2014 | • Clients of family planning (n=240) between 20-40years | Facility survey, observation, and client interview | Client satisfaction measured through Likert scale and then binary outcome variable was created as satisfied and not satisfied. | Chi-square test | No limitation information was provided | Moderate |
SD- Standard Deviation
Key characteristics of qualitative studies included in the review.
| First author, year of publication and reference number | Aim(s) of the study | Country and year of study | Study Participants and sample size | Data collection method (s) and analysis | Limitations identified by the author(s) | Quality Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lewis 1995[ | To define the laypersons' and providers' dimensions of quality of care and compare them with the Bruce-Jain elements. | Kenya 1994 | Women 15-49 years (N=31); Service providers (n=17), simulated clients (n=51) | • FGD | No limitation information was given | Moderate |
| Mugisha 2008[ | To assess providers’ perceptions of quality of care and the barriers to quality services at the organizational and societal levels. | Uganda 2002 | • Service providers and managers (n= 38, midwives=33; nurses=6) | • FGD | No limitation information was given | High |
| Keesara 2015[ | To describes women’s expectations and experiences when seeking contraceptive care from private and public facilities in Nairobi. | Kenya 2013/2014 | Postpartum reproductive aged women (n= 91) | • FGD | • Participants lived far away from public facility were not included. | High |
* FGD- Focus Group Discussions
**those findings from simulated clients were not included in this analysis
Summary of the statistically significant factors affecting quality of care in family planning services in Africa.
| First Author, year of publication and reference number | Factors for QoC in FP services | Authors conclusions | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Socio-demographic and other factors | Structural Factors | Process Factors | Controlled variables during multivariate analysis | ||
| Abdel-Tewab 2002[ | Client’s age less than 35 (AOR=0.3), physicians age less than 35 (AOR=0.2) | Client-centred communication (AOR= 2.8), high positive talk by physician (AOR= 2.0), FP methods chosen by the client (AOR=3.3) | Physician’s duration of stay in the project, Physician’s attendance on the training course focusing on counselling and interpersonal communication, types of FP used, Physicians to clients talk ratio. | Client-centred communication was associated with a three-fold increase in the likelihood of client satisfaction. In addition, solidarity statements by the physician (positive talk) was also important for client satisfaction. | |
| Agha 2009[ | Private facility (AOR=3.1), Hospital (AOR=0.4), Region: Central province (AOR=8.9), coast (AOR= 0.2), client’s age 25-34(AOR=0.4), 34+ (AOR=0.07), client’s primary education (AOR=0.07), secondary education (AOR=0.008) | Index of services availability (AOR=1.7), number of staff per facility (AOR=1.002), providers with 7+ years of experience (AOR=3.9), providers received family planning training in last 3 years (AOR= 3.6), providers believed supervisor support would help improve (AOR= 4.6), provider believed incentives would help improve services (AOR=3.1), Provider believed there was opportunity for promotion (AOR= 3.1), clients paid for family planning (AOR=0.4) | Confidentiality assured (AOR= 1.8), high reproductive history and physical examination score (AOR=1.2), longer waiting time (AOR=0.98), | • Catchment population, | Client satisfaction is much higher at private facilities. Technical quality of care provided is similar in public and private facilities. |
| Hutchinson 2011[ | • | • | • | In the three countries, the catchment population, structural factors such as number of staff, system for quality assurance, number of FP trained and process factors such as visual and auditory privacy, client concerns noted were controlled | Private health facilities appear to be of higher (interpersonal) process quality than public facilities Client satisfaction appears considerably higher at private facilities |
| Tafese 2013[ | Educational status (β2=0.09) | Perceived sufficiency of consultation | Marital status, preferences of additional children, discussion with husband/partner, occupational status, religion, age, and waiting time | • There was lack of critical resources for the provision of quality family planning services. | |
| Wang 2014[ | • | • | • | Clients age, Educational status | • The client satisfaction score was higher at clinics and other types of facilities than hospitals/health centres in Senegal. |
| Assaf 2015[ | Client’s education: no education (AOR= 2.1), primary and post primary (AOR=2.0), provider’s years of education: 6-12 years (AOR=2.9), 13-16years (AOR=3.4) facility region: Dakar (AOR=4.8), Thies (AOR=2.5), central (AOR=11.5), South (AOR=13.9) | Client left with FP methods (AOR=3.7), No counselling on methods side effects (AOR=2.6), counselling on when to return (AOR=2.0), No waiting time (AOR=5.4) | Client age, payment for services, client status, types of contraceptive method used, provider’s job description, provider salary, counselled on how to use the method, health facility type, general structure equipment composite index | The effectiveness of the different forms of counselling was not seen in the outcomes of client overall satisfaction. | |
| Argago 2015[ | Repeated client (AOR=3.04), history of side effect (AOR=0.121), history of unintended pregnancy (AOR=2.8) | Less than 30min to reach the services (AOR= 5.5), convenient opening hour (AOR=4.73), perceived health facility unclean (AOR= 0.192) | Clients who were advised on how to use the method (AOR=3.43) privacy ensured (AOR= 5.08) | Parity, still birth, number of living children, respect and courtesy, giving written information, told about the methods side effects | The frequency of FP visit, waiting time, cleanness of health facilities, history of side effect, history of unintended pregnancy, and information on how to use methods, privacy during examination and procedure and convenience of opening hour were the predictors of client satisfaction. |
| Nasr 2016[ | Waiting place | privacy during examination | Confounders not controlled | The number of received training program affects quality of family planning counselling of nurse’s practice, providers of the services and the provided services affect the client satisfaction. | |
AOR- Adjusted Odds Ratio β1- Regression coefficient for linear regression analysis β2 = regression coefficient for logistic regression analysis FP-Family Planning H- Hospital (analysis done for hospitals/health centres) C- Clinic/other facilities (analysis done for client/other facilities)
* the factors included only significant factors adjusted for confounders.
** Information given about the method and the time spent for consultation
*** clinic site is easy to get and short waiting time
$ p- value for chi-square less than 0.05
Synthesis of qualitative findings on how clients perceive factors determining the quality of care in family planning services.
| Findings | Category | Synthesized findings |
|---|---|---|
| Participants identified proximity to facility and cost as important considerations for choosing a source, the mode of travel and time to source were never mentioned directly as reasons for choosing a facility. | 1. Proximity of services influenced access | |
| Proximity was stated as a reason for choice of service delivery points in two ways. Sometimes the respondents gave it as the sole reason for choice or in a combination with other reasons. | ||
| From the combination of reasons for which choice is made, it is clear that proximity is a facilitating factor but not sufficient to sustain use at a health facility. | ||
| Participants identified proximity to facility and cost as important considerations for choosing a source, the mode of travel and time to source were never mentioned directly as reasons for choosing a facility. | 2. Cost of services influenced clients choice of facilities/ access | |
| Among the private clinics, the clients were also able to rank facilities according to the cost of services. | ||
| Though clients complain about cost, they recognize the higher quality of services at Non-Governmental health facilities. | ||
| Women reported that private facilities offered long and convenient service hours that accommodated women’s busy schedules. One woman explained that public facilities often closed before they attended to everyone. | 3. Clients tend to prefer facilities having convenient opening hours | |
| Some women said that they had wasted time waiting at the public facilities for free services, only to find that their preferred method was not available. One woman began to obtain her contraception at a private facility when she found that public facilities did not stock all methods consistently | 4. Availability of preferred method (method mix) | |
| 5. Administrative issues in terms of putting pre-requisites for taking contraceptive influences access for family planning services | ||
| Another woman explained that she chose a private facility because she wanted to bypass obstructive processes that she foresaw at the public facility. She had planned to obtain the contraceptive implant at a public facility during her six-week postpartum visit. However, when she received her period four weeks after delivery, she opted for a private facility. | ||
| Women explained that workers at private facilities always provided whichever method was requested. One woman complained that nurses at the public facility prevented her from switching to the injectable contraceptive, so she went to a private facility where they administered her desired method. | 1. Responsiveness: Respect for client’s needs and freedom to choose was identified as a factor client’s access to family planning services | |
| When you walk to a private clinic, you will tell them that you need an injection and when you walk there asking for an injection that is what you will be given. | ||
| … the high degree of dissatisfaction with methods and lack of provider responsiveness to the clients' problems and needs. | ||
| While public facilities were able to provide a broad overview of side effects, they were not able to provide individualized attention. Due to crowded facilities in public healthcare settings, some women were not given the opportunity to address problems with their current method. One woman described her disappointment about not receiving adequate counseling from a public facility when she returned with irregular vaginal bleeding | ||
| Woman in the individual interviews said they preferred public facilities when they needed more decision-making support or guidance for initial selection of a contraceptive method. | ||
| ….what irritates clients is when they think the providers are idling while they wait…. | 2. Waiting time to receive family planning services related with quality of care | |
| The private sector clinics have a better image with respect to waiting time. | ||
| ….they would like family planning services to be provided within an hour of their arrival so that they could get back to their homes quickly before their absence is noticed. | ||
| Even though family planning services were free at the public hospitals, one woman explained that she was willing to pay for contraception at private facilities to avoid waiting in long lines: | ||
| In the public institutions complaints are mostly related to provider behavior while those from the private clinics tend to be related to structural constraints of facilities. | 3. Provider behaviour while talking to the client identified as a barrier for quality of care | |
| Respectful treatment was an added benefit of private facilities. Women believed that private facilities treated their customers with care and attention compared to public facilities where participants experienced verbal harassment, inattention, and rudeness. Respectful behaviour included answering questions kindly and allowing sufficient time for each client. One woman described how rude behaviour at public facilities drove clients to private clinics | ||
| …Though the providers in public institutions are talked of negatively, it should also be pointed out that there are some of them well commended by clients. | ||
| ….Sometimes the client is just told to use a certain method and she accepts. | 4. Information provision and support in reaching a decision was identified as an important aspect in the delivery of family planning services | |
| Because of concern for side effects, almost every woman described an ideal family planning visit as one with ample counseling about side effects and support from the provider to choose a method that minimized side effects | ||
| Focus groups participants noted that the private facilities prioritized profit over providing safe medical treatment. While some women mentioned that private providers at non-governmental organization (NGOs) answered questions fully, most women said that most private facilities did not provide counseling or decision support when administering a method. | ||
| While public facilities were able to provide a broad overview of side effects, they were not able to provide individualized attention. Due to crowded facilities in public healthcare settings, some women were not given the opportunity to address problems with their current method. One woman described her disappointment about not receiving adequate counseling from a public facility when she returned with irregular vaginal bleeding | ||
| Woman in the individual interviews said they preferred public facilities when they needed more decision-making support or guidance for initial selection of a contraceptive method. | ||
| Privacy and confidentiality also came up when the topic of client home visits was raised. | 5. Maintaining the privacy and confidentiality of clients during family planning provision was valued by clients. | |
| Women said they used private facilities when they required more confidentiality. One woman related a story of a friend who chose to receive family planning at a private facility to hide her use from her husband. | ||
| Medical examinations were identified by both clients and providers as an important component of family planning service provision which affects choice, continuation and satisfaction with services. | 6. Range of services including eligibility screening, blood tests, and physical assessment was valued by clients | |
| While public facilities were able to provide a broad overview of side effects, they were not able to provide individualized attention. Due to crowded facilities in public healthcare settings, some women were not given the opportunity to address problems with their current method. One woman described her disappointment about not receiving adequate counseling from a public facility when she returned with irregular vaginal bleeding. | ||
| An important factor for the recipient of services was the age and maturity of the providers. | 1. Clients perceived to receive family planning services from older and matured provider | |
| Those who did not mind about the sex of the provider were more concerned about the knowledge and skill of the provider | 2. Provider competency in terms of adequate knowledge and skill was valued by clients. | |
| In individual interviews, women elaborated on their perceptions of the deficiencies in private facilities, which included questionable medications, poor eligibility screening, poorly qualified staff, and poor quality counseling. | ||
| Other women were concerned about the competency of private facility providers. This woman explained her concerns about private providers and her preference for well-qualified public providers | ||
| While it was expected that private facilities would provide a consistent stock of contraceptive supplies, women worried that these facilities administered fraudulent and expired medications to unaware clients. A few women stated that private facilities were more likely to stock expired contraceptives because their inventory exceeded their client flow. This woman attributed two incidences of failed contraception to fraudulent medication provided at private facilities |
Synthesis of qualitative findings on how providers perceive factors determining the quality of care in family planning services.
| Findings | Categories | Synthesized findings |
|---|---|---|
| Like the clients, the providers believed that their clinics were chosen partly because of their competitive fees. | 1. Cost incurred for family planning services was identified as barriers for family planning services | |
| Perceptions of clients’ ability to pay for services influenced the type of care providers offered. Sometimes providers would not bother to make referrals for contraceptive methods or medical treatment if they believed that financial support was lacking. | ||
| Lack of supplies was the most commonly cited barrier to quality family planning services. The few providers who reported that they had enough contraceptive supplies still said they lacked disinfectant, gloves, family planning cards and educational materials. Some stock-outs of contraceptives and other supplies were reported to last 3–6 months and led to discontinuation. | 2. Lack of family planning supplies (equipment’s, contraceptive methods, and other materials) were perceived as barriers for family planning services provision | |
| Providers and managers agreed that many family planning clinics did not stock implants and intrauterine devices because they lacked trained providers who could insert them. Furthermore, lack of training resulted in some providers imposing menstruation barriers–meaning a client must be menstruating before starting a contraceptive method–because they were concerned about inadvertently giving a method to a pregnant woman. Managers agreed this practice occurred and admitted this could result in unintended pregnancies. | ||
| Almost all providers felt that the quality of care they could offer was compromised because they were overloaded with work, and managers confirmed some clinics were understaffed. | 3. Workload of providers was identified as factor quality of care in family planning services | |
| …..the providers were critical of some of their inconsiderate actions at the clinics…. | 1. Provider behaviour while interacting with clients was identified as a factor for quality of care | |
| Providers reported that many women secretly used contraceptive methods. A woman who hides use and experiences a side effect is at risk of stopping the method rather than switching to a method that might be detected by her husband, they said. Informed choice loses much of its meaning when the primary use criterion is a method that cannot be detected. | 2. Privacy and confidentiality for client from other clients and parents were factor for quality of care | |
| Medical examination were identified by both clients and providers as an important component of family planning service provision which affects choice, continuation and satisfaction with services. | 3. Providers perceived range of services such as conducting medical examination as an important element in the provision of family planning services |