| Literature DB >> 28058200 |
Eshetu Bekele Worku1, Selamawit Alemu Woldesenbet2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: In resource-limited settings, the uptake of antenatal care visits among women, especially teenage pregnant women, is disturbingly low. Factors that influence the uptake of ANC services among teenage women is largely understudied and poorly understood in John Taolo Gaetsewe (JTG), a predominantly rural and poor district of South Africa. The aim of this study was to determine the factors that influence uptake of ANC services among teenage mothers in JTG district.Entities:
Keywords: Antenatal Care Visits; John Taolo Gaetsewe; Social Determinants of Health; Teenage Pregnancy
Year: 2016 PMID: 28058200 PMCID: PMC5187645
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J MCH AIDS ISSN: 2161-864X
Sociodemographic characteristics and descriptive analysis of the study respondents
| Variable | Variable categories | Respondents | < 19 years of age (%) | >20 years of age (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age in years | n | 272 | 51 (18.68) | 221 (81.32) |
| Marital status | n | 272 | 51 (18.68) | 221 (81.32) |
| Married | 46 (16.91%) | 3 (5.88) | 43 (19.46) | |
| Living together | 26 (9.56%) | 5 (9.8) | 21 (9.5) | |
| Divorced/widowed | 5 (1.84%) | 1 (1.96) | 4 (1.82) | |
| Single | 195 (71.69%) | 42 (82.35) | 153 (69.23) | |
| Highest education | n | 272 | 51 (18.68) | 221 (81.32) |
| School not attended | 6 (2.21%) | None | 6 (2.21) | |
| Elementary | 53 (19.56%) | 6 (11.76) | 47 (21.35) | |
| High school | 188 (69.37%) | 44 (86.27) | 144 (65.45) | |
| College or above | 24 (8.86%) | 1 (1.96) | 23 (10.45) | |
| Employment status | n | 263 | 50 (19.01) | 213 (80.98) |
| Employed | 40 (15.21%) | 3 (6) | 37 (17.37) | |
| Unemployed | 223 (84.79%) | 47 (94) | 176 (82.63) | |
| Total monthly income | n | 252 | 46 (18.25) | 206 (81.74) |
| < RI000 | 138 (54.76%) | 27 (58.7) | 111 (53.88) | |
| ≥ R1000 & < R3000 | 52 (20.63%) | 9 (19.57) | 43 (20.87) | |
| ≥ R3000 & < R5000 | 35 (13.89%) | 4 (8.7) | 31 (15.05) | |
| ≥ R5000 | 27 (10.71%) | 6 (13.04) | 21 (10.19) | |
| Housing | n | 269 | 51 (18.95) | 218 (81.04) |
| Own house | 77 (28.62%) | 13 (25.49) | 64 (29.36) | |
| Rented | 17 (6.32%) | 4 (7.84) | 13 (5.96) | |
| Living with relative/spouse | 175 (65.06%) | 34 (66.66) | 141 (64.68) | |
| Main source of water | n | 272 | 51 (18.75) | 221 (81.25) |
| Tap | 254 (93.38%) | 47 (92.16) | 207 (93.67) | |
| Bore hole/well | 6 (2.21%) | 1 (1.96) | 5 (2.26) | |
| River/other | 12 (4.41%) | 3 (5.88) | 9 (4.07) | |
| Connected to electricity | n | 272 | 51 (18.75) | 221 (81.25) |
| Connected | 242 (88.97%) | 45 (88.24) | 197 (89.14) | |
| Not connected | 30 (11.03%) | 6 (11.76) | 24 (10.86) | |
| Type of toilet | n | 267 | 50 | 217 |
| Flush toilet | 58 (21.72%) | 13 (26) | 45 (20.74) | |
| Pit latrine | 117 (43.82%) | 24 (48) | 93 (42.86) | |
| Ventilated pit latrine | 84 (31.46%) | 12 (24) | 72 (33.18) | |
| Other | 8 (2.99%) | 1 (2) | 7 (3.23) | |
| Service satisfaction | n | 272 | 51 (18.75) | 221 (81.25) |
| Yes | 255 (93.77%) | 49 (96) | 207 (93.24) | |
| No | 17 (6.23%) | 2 (3.92) | 15(6.76) | |
| Was the pregnancy planned | n | 272 | 51 (18.75) | 221 (81.25) |
| Yes | 93 (34.19%) | 13 (25.49) | 80 (36.2) | |
| No | 179 (63.91%) | 87 (74.51) | 141 (63.8) | |
| Number of ANC visits | n | 272 | 51 (18.75) | 221 (81.25) |
| >=4 ANC visits | 80 (29.3%) | 19 (37.25) | 61 (27.52) | |
| <=3 ANC visits | 192 (70.7%) | 32 (62.75) | 16 (72.52) | |
| Smoke cigarette | n | 264 | 51 (19.31) | 213 (80.68) |
| Yes | 74 (28.03%) | 27 (53) | 47 (22.07) | |
| No | 190 (71.97%) | 24 (47) | 166 (77.93) | |
| Alcohol consumption | n | 251 | 48 (19.12) | 203 (80.87) |
| Yes | 70 (27.89%) | 11 (22.92) | 59 (29.06) | |
| No | 181 (72.11%) | 37 (77.08) | 143 (71.94) | |
Estimates obtained from binary logistic regression analysis on number of ANC visits
| Dependent Variable : Number of ANC visits (1, 0) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Variables | Odds Ratio | P-value | 95% confidence interval |
| Mother age | 2.11 | 0.038 | 1.04-4.27 |
| Marital status | 0.57 | 0.097 | 0.29-1.10 |
| Distance to health facility | 3.38 | 0.005 | 1.45-7.87 |
| Relationship | 0.59 | 0.56 9 | 0.23-1.49 |
| Waiting time | 0.85 | 0.710 | 0.85-1.92 |
| Service satisfaction | 8.58 | 0.003 | 2.10-34.95 |
| Fear of HIV test | 1.36 | 0.549 | 0.49-3.74 |
| Fist ANC booking time | 0.95 | 0.876 | 0.52-1.72 |
| Employment status | 1.44 | 0.418 | 0.59-3.55 |
| Education level | 0.81 | 0.693 | 0.28-2.28 |
| Partner support | 0.76 | 0. 397 | 0.39-1.46 |
| Number of observations | 261 | ||
| Pseudo R-Square | 0.0938 | ||
| Prob>chi2 | 0.0020 | ||
| LR chi2 (11) | 29.38 | ||
Estimates obtained from binary logistic regression analysis on time of first ANC visits
| Dependent variable: Time of first ANC visits (1, 0) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Variables | Odds ratio | P-value | 95% confidence interval |
| Mother age | 0.077 | 0.338 | 0.081-0.023 |
| Marital status | 0.005 | 0. 946 | 0.151-0.141 |
| Distance to health facility | 0.095 | 0.323 | 0.297-0.098 |
| Relationship | 0.008 | 0.926 | 0.169-0.186 |
| Waiting time | 0.071 | 0.395 | 0.093-0.236 |
| Service satisfaction | 0.068 | 0.654 | 0.217-0.205 |
| Fear of HIV test | 0.006 | 0.955 | 0.217-0.205 |
| Total ANC visit | 0.009 | 0.894 | 0.153-0.135 |
| Employment status | 0.028 | 0.755 | 0.152-0.210 |
| Education level | 0.159 | 0.165 | 0.065-0.384 |
| Partner support | 0.095 | 0. 18 | 0.046-0.236 |
| Number of observations | 261 | ||
| Pseudo R-Square | 0.035 | ||
| Prob>chi2 | 0.598 | ||
| LR chi2 (11) | 49.8 | ||