| Literature DB >> 30521640 |
Gezahegn Tesfaye1,2, Catherine Chojenta2, Roger Smith3, Deborah Loxton2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In Ethiopia, the uptake of antenatal care services has been low. Moreover, there is less frequent and late attendance of antenatal care among women who attend. Using the Anderson-Newman model of health care utilization, this study identified factors that either facilitate or impede antenatal care utilization in Kersa district, Eastern Ethiopia.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30521640 PMCID: PMC6283597 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0208729
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Predictor variables for PNC utilization and their operational definitions.
| Variable category | Operational definition |
|---|---|
| Maternal education | Formal schooling status starting from attending elementary school |
| Mass media availability | Presence of communication tools such as TV, radio or internet in the household |
| Telephone ownership | Ownership of mobile telephone at the household level |
| Education on maternal health | Receiving education on maternal health (such as the use of maternity service, and nutrition) from any source |
| Age at marriage | Completed in years at the time when the respondent first married |
| Age at first pregnancy | Completed in years at the time when the respondent first got pregnant |
| Birth order | Birthing order of the index child in the woman’s life |
| Previous use of ANC | Practice of ANC for any of the previous pregnancies in the woman’s life |
| Living in a model family | A woman who lives in a family which adopted and implemented the full health extension service packages in Ethiopia |
| Best friend’s use of maternal care | A friend who regularly shared the woman’s feelings, emotions, and opinions and various behavioural practices important in the woman’s life and uses services such as ANC, delivery care and PNC |
| Place of residence | |
| Type of | Based on the living site of the woman ( |
| Wealth index | Produced from the existing variables (household assets ownership, household characteristics and access to utilities) from the data set through factor analysis using Principal Component Analysis (PCA) |
| Head of the household | A person who is responsible for heading the household |
| Decision making on household expenses | A person who decide on household matters including whether to visit health facilities during illness or emergency conditions |
| Husband’s attitude | Respondent’s judgement about the feeling of her husband towards ANC while she was pregnant |
| Social support | Type of help the woman received from her best friends during pregnancy, labour and post-delivery (prompted question) |
| Awareness of pregnancy complication | Respondents were asked whether they had knowledge of any dangerous pregnancy-related symptoms (such as bleeding) |
| Perceived importance of ANC | Women’s perception of how useful ANC attendance is for a healthy pregnant woman |
| Pregnancy intention | Women’s thinking on whether their last pregnancy was planned or not |
| HEW home visit | Receiving visit and health education by a HEW at woman’s home |
| History of abortion | Lifetime number of abortion coded as Yes or No |
Basic socio-demographic characteristics of the respondents, Kersa district, Eastern Ethiopia.
| Variables | Frequency | Percentage |
|---|---|---|
| 15–24 | 411 | 31.8 |
| 25–34 | 652 | 50.4 |
| 35–49 | 231 | 17.9 |
| Married | 1277 | 98.7 |
| Others | 17 | 1.3 |
| Monogamous | 1205 | 94.2 |
| Polygamous | 74 | 5.8 |
| Oromo | 1274 | 98.5 |
| Others ( | 20 | 1.5 |
| Muslim | 1253 | 96.8 |
| Others | 41 | 3.2 |
| Housewife | 1240 | 95.8 |
| Government employee | 24 | 1.9 |
| Merchant | 19 | 1.5 |
| Farmer | 11 | 0.9 |
| Never attended | 941 | 72.7 |
| Elementary (1–8) | 267 | 20.6 |
| Secondary (9–12) | 61 | 4.7 |
| Tertiary (12+) | 25 | 1.9 |
| Highest | 258 | 19.9 |
| Fourth | 261 | 20.2 |
| Middle | 260 | 20.1 |
| Second | 258 | 19.9 |
| Lowest | 257 | 19.9 |
| Never attended | 645 | 50.4 |
| Elementary | 438 | 34.2 |
| Secondary | 133 | 10.4 |
| Tertiary | 63 | 4.9 |
| Farmer | 1156 | 90.4 |
| Daily labourer | 29 | 2.3 |
| Government employee | 65 | 5.1 |
| Merchant | 29 | 2.3 |
| Yes | 574 | 44.4 |
| No | 720 | 55.6 |
Fig 1Sources of information about ANC among reproductive women in Kersa district, Eastern Ethiopia, 2017.
Antenatal care utilization among reproductive-aged women in Kersa district, Eastern Ethiopia, 2017.
| Variable | Number | Percentage |
|---|---|---|
| Yes | 464 | 43.8 |
| No | 595 | 56.2 |
| Yes | 693 | 53.6 |
| No | 601 | 46.4 |
| Yes | 138 | 19.9 |
| No | 555 | 80.1 |
| Doctor/health officer | 54 | 7.8 |
| Nurse/midwife | 470 | 67.8 |
| Health extension worker | 235 | 33.9 |
| Other | 14 | 2.1 |
| ≤3 months (Early ANC) | 226 | 32.6 |
| >3 months (Late ANC) | 457 | 67.9 |
| Don’t know | 10 | 1.4 |
| Once | 79 | 11.4 |
| Twice | 163 | 23.5 |
| Three times | 345 | 49.8 |
| Four and more | 106 | 15.3 |
| Government hospital | 15 | 2.2 |
| Government health centre | 492 | 71 |
| Government health post | 204 | 29.4 |
| Private hospital/clinics | 44 | 6.3 |
| Home | 59 | 8.5 |
| Other | 3 | 0.4 |
*Does not sum up to the due to the possibility of multiple responses
Fig 2Commonly mentioned self-reported reasons for non-attendance of ANC among reproductive-aged women in Kersa district, Eastern Ethiopia, 2017.
Fig 3Timing of first ANC by place of residence and previous use of ANC among reproductive-aged women in Kersa district, Eastern Ethiopia, 2017.
Factors associated with ANC utilization among reproductive aged women in Kersa district, Eastern Ethiopia, 2017.
| ANC at least one AOR (95% CI) ( | ANC at least one AOR (95% CI) ( | ANC 4+ AOR (95% CI) ( | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Never attended | 1 | 1 | 1 | |
| Attended | 1.50(0.92, 2.46) | 1.18(0.69, 2.02) | ||
| Never attended | 1 | 1 | 1 | |
| Attended | 1.21(0.83, 1.74) | 1.91(0.81, 4.48) | 1.06(0.62, 1.79) | |
| Yes | 0.96(0.66, 1.40) | 1.71(0.74, 3.97) | ||
| No | 1 | 1 | ||
| Yes | 1.01(0.66, 1.52) | 1.10(0.45, 2.62) | ||
| No | 1 | 1 | ||
| Yes | 0.73(0.45, 1.17) | 1.03(0.39, 2.77) | ||
| No | 1 | 1 | ||
| 1.09(0.92, 1.28) | ||||
| 1.03(0.88, 1.21) | ||||
| ≤3rd | 1 | |||
| >3rd | 0.85(0.59, 1.25) | |||
| Yes | 1 | |||
| No | ||||
| Yes | 1 | 1 | ||
| No | 1.15(0.31, 4.24) | 0.58(0.25, 1.35) | ||
| Yes | 1 | 1 | ||
| No/don’t know | ||||
| Yes | 1 | |||
| No | 0.73(0.43, 1.25) | |||
| Rural | 1 | 1 | 1 | |
| Urban | 0.50(0.22, 1.14) | 0.94(0.21, 4.15) | 1.07(0.58, 1.96) | |
| HDSS | 1.61(0.66, 3.92) | |||
| Non-HDSS | 1 | 1 | ||
| Highest | 1.52(0.85, 2.70) | |||
| Fourth | ||||
| Middle | 1.21(0.69, 2.12) | |||
| Second | 1.68(0.98, 2.89) | |||
| Lowest | 1 | 1 | ||
| Respondent | 1 | 1 | ||
| Jointly | 1.50(0.91, 2.48) | 1.99(0.64, 6.20) | ||
| Partner/parents | 1.34(0.66, 2.71) | 2.07(0.50, 8.03) | ||
| Respondent | 1 | |||
| Partner/parents | ||||
| Positive | 1 | 1 | 1 | |
| Negative/neutral | ||||
| Yes | 1 | 1 | ||
| No | 0.69(0.37, 1.29) | 0.67 (0.24, 1.83) | ||
| Yes | ||||
| No | ||||
| Intended | 1 | |||
| Unintended | 0.73(0.49, 1.09) | |||
| Has no history | 1 | |||
| Has history | ||||
| Yes | 1 | 1 | 1 | |
| No | ||||
| Not important | 1 | 1 | ||
| Important | 2.12(0.74, 6.08) |
Key: : Adjusted Odds Ratio (adjusting for all the , and factors in final full model), : Confidence Interval (95%)
statistically significant variables
statistically significant variables in the two models (m1 and m2) of “at least one ANC” outcome
Fig 4Modifiable predisposing, enabling and need factors associated with ANC utilization for government intervention based on ANBM, 2017.