| Literature DB >> 31807590 |
Khadijeh Sarayloo1, Zahra Behboodi Moghadam2, Mohsen Saffari3, Habibollah Esmaily4, Khadijeh Mirzaii Najmabadi5.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: It is essential to provide key information and support to every woman regarding pregnancy and childbirth to enable all women to make a fully informed decision regarding their choice of reproduction. The study aimed to find the impact of an educational program based on the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) on health promotion and childbearing of minor thalassemia couples. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: This study was quasi-experimental. A total of 70 women with minor thalassemia held in Minudasht health center were classified into two groups: study and control. The study group received the educational program based on TPB, and the control group only received the routine program. The data were collected using the TPB-based questionnaire at baseline and 3 months after the intervention. They were analyzed by Chi-square, Student's t-test, Wilcoxon test, and regression analysis through SPSS version 16.Entities:
Keywords: Childbearing; Theory of Planned Behavior; health promotion; minor thalassemia; randomized controlled trial
Year: 2019 PMID: 31807590 PMCID: PMC6852303 DOI: 10.4103/jehp.jehp_109_19
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Educ Health Promot ISSN: 2277-9531
Figure 1Consort diagram of the study
Methods of modulating the structures of theory of planned behavior
| The structures of TPB | Methods/materials |
|---|---|
| Attitudes | Brainstorming |
| Question and answer | |
| Subjective norm | Role-playing |
| Panel discussion | |
| Discussion | |
| Perceived behavioral control | Discussion on facilitators |
| Encouragers | |
| Patterns of the role of desirable behavior | |
| Behavior | Role models |
TPB=Theory of planned behavior
Frequency distribution of education, occupation, time of marriage, previous abortion, previous unwanted pregnancy, using contraceptive method, child with major thalassemia, and contraceptive method in two groups
| Variables | Group | Control, | Study, | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Education | Primary | 10 (28.8) | 14 (40) | 0.448 |
| High school | 11 (31.40) | 7 (20) | ||
| Diploma≤ | 14 (40) | 14 (40) | ||
| Occupation | Homemaker | 30 (85.71) | 32 (91.43) | 0.452 |
| Employed | 5 (14.29) | 3 (8.57) | ||
| Time of marriage (year) | 1≥ | 3 (8.6) | 1 (2.9) | 0.462 |
| 2-4 | 1 (2.9) | 3 (8.6) | ||
| 5-7 | 3 (8.6) | 5 (14.3) | ||
| 7≤ | 28 (80) | 26 (74.3) | ||
| Previous abortion (because of major thalassemia) | Yes | 9 (25.7) | 8 (22.9) | 0.780 |
| No | 26 (74.3) | 27 (77.1) | ||
| Previous unwanted pregnancy | Yes | 4 (11.43) | 5 (14.28) | 0.721 |
| No | 31 (88.57) | 30 (85.72) | ||
| Using contraceptive method | Yes | 25 (71.4) | 20 (57.1) | 0.212 |
| No | 10 (28.6) | 15 (42.9) | ||
| Child with major thalassemia | Yes | 11 (31.43) | 12 (34.28) | 0.799 |
| No | 24 (68.57) | 23 (65.72) | ||
| Contraceptive method | Nothing | 13 (37.1) | 14 (40) | 0.757 |
| Pills | 5 (14.3) | 7 (20) | ||
| Ampule | 2 (5.7) | 1 (2.9) | ||
| IUD | 0 (0) | 1 (2.9) | ||
| Condom | 2 (5.7) | 3 (8.6) | ||
| Withdrawal | 13 (37.1) | 9 (25.7) |
IUD=Intrauterine device
Comparison of mean age, gravida, living child, abortion, and abortion (because of major thalassemia) in two groups
| Variables | Mean±SD | Test* Independent sample | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Control | Study | ||
| Age | 31.08±6.66 | 30.69±6.20 | |
| Gravida | 2.48±1.75 | 2.65±1.66 | |
| Living child | 1.63±1.65 | 2.11±1.38 | |
| Abortion | <0.001 (1.00) | <0.001 (1.00) | |
| Abortion (because of major thalassemia) | <0.001 (1.00) | <0.001 (0.00) | |
*The variables with normal distribution were described by mean±SD and compared with Student t-test, **The abnormal variables are described with the median (interquartile range) and compared with Mann-Whitney test. SD=Standard deviation
Mean score of attitude, subjective norms, perceived behavioral control, and intention and behavior in both groups before and after the intervention
| Variables | Group | Mean±SD | Paired | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Before the intervention | After the intervention | ||||
| Attitude | Control | 49.65±5.16 | 52.51±9.83 | 1.603 | 0.118 |
| Study | 50.85±6.77 | 71.08±4.01 | 16.136 | <0.001 | |
| Independent | 0.833 | 10.342 | |||
| 0.408 | <0.001 | ||||
| Subjective norms | Control | 29.47±8.84 | 29.63±9.47 | −0.138 | 0.891 |
| Study | 32.81±10.72 | 65.71±10.35 | −12.581 | <0.001 | |
| Independent | 1.425 | 15.212 | |||
| 0.159 | <0.001 | ||||
| Perceived behavioral control | Control | 33.82±9.06 | 36.34±13.35 | −1.179 | 0.247 |
| Study | 37.94±9.67 | 61.02±4.74 | −13.180 | <0.001 | |
| Independent | 1.836 | 10.297 | |||
| 0.071 | <0.001 | ||||
| Behavioral intention | Control | 28±7.37 | 32.38±17.72 | −1.221 | 0.222 |
| Study | 31.62±40.64 | 65.52±9.36 | −5.129 | <0.001 | |
| Mann-Whitney** | 1.653 | 9.784 | |||
| 0.103 | <0.001 | ||||
| Behavior | Control | 20±40.58 | 22.86±45.83 | 0.577 | 0.564 |
| Study | 28.57±45.83 | 91.42±28.40 | −4.690 | <0.001 | |
| Mann-Whitney | −0.830 | −5.755 | |||
| 0.406 | <0.001 | ||||
*The constructs of TPB with normal distribution were described by mean±SD and compared with Student t-test, **The abnormal variables are described with the median (interquartile range) and compared with Mann-Whitney test. TPB=Theory of planned behavior, SD=Standard deviation
The result of the analysis of variance on efficacy of education based on theory of planned behavior
| Construct of TPB | The regression coefficient | SD | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Behavior | ||||
| Study group | 65 | 7.623 | 8.531 | <0.001 |
| Control group | 0 | - | - | - |
| Before | 0.413 | 0.089 | 4.641 | <0.001 |
Before intervention, the variables of ethnicity and spouse education were controlled for behavior. TPB=Theory of planned behavior, SD=Standard deviation