| Literature DB >> 32599688 |
Chelsea M Cooper1, Jacqueline Wille1, Steven Shire2, Sheila Makoko2, Asnakew Tsega3, Anne Schuster1, Hannah Hausi4, Hannah Gibson2, Hannah Tappis1.
Abstract
The Government of Malawi's Health Sector Strategic Plan II highlights the importance of service integration; however, in practice, this has not been fully realized. We conducted a mixed methods evaluation of efforts to systematically implement integrated family planning and immunization services in all health facilities and associated community sites in Ntchisi and Dowa districts during June 2016-September 2017. Methods included secondary analysis of service statistics (pre- and postintervention), focus group discussions with mothers and fathers of children under age one, and in-depth interviews with service providers, supervisors, and managers. Results indicate statistically significant increases in family planning users and shifts in use of family planning services from health facilities to community sites. The intervention had no effect on immunization doses administered or dropout rates. According to mothers and fathers, benefits of service integration included time savings, convenience, and improved understanding of services. Provision and use of integrated services were affected by availability of human resources and commodities, community linkages, data collection procedures and availability, sociocultural barriers, organization of services, and supervision and commitment of health surveillance assistants. The integration approach was perceived to be feasible and beneficial by clients and providers.Entities:
Keywords: Malawi; child health; contraception; evaluation; family planning; immunization; integrated service delivery; reproductive health
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32599688 PMCID: PMC7345913 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17124530
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1The family planning–immunization integration implementation approach.
Respondent characteristics.
| Data Collection Activity | Participant Type | Number of Participants: Dowa | Number of Participants: Ntchisi | Number of Participants: Total (Dowa + Ntchisi) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Men with infants < 1 year | 1 FGD (7 respondents) | 1 FGD (6 respondents) | 2 FGD (13 respondents) |
| Women with infants < 1 year who accepted immunization referrals | 4 FGDs (36 respondents) | 4 FGDs (23 respondents) | 8 FGDs (59 respondents) | |
| Women with infants < 1 year who accepted FP referrals | 8 FGDs (48 respondents) | 8 FGDs (64 respondents) | 16 FGDs (112 respondents) | |
| Women with infants < 1 year who declined FP referrals | 8 FGDs (37 respondents) | 3 FGDs (20 respondents) | 11 FGDs (57 respondents) | |
|
| Women with infants < 1 year who declined FP referrals | 0 | 3 | 3 |
| Community-based HSAs | 2 | 2 | 4 | |
| Facility-based HSAs | 4 | 4 | 8 | |
| FP providers (nurses) | 4 | 4 | 8 | |
| Facility supervisors | 4 | 3 | 7 | |
| Program managers: district | 3 | 3 | 6 | |
| Program managers: national | 2 | |||
FGD = focus group discussions; FP = family planning; HSAs = health surveillance assistants.
Figure 2Total family planning users at implementation sites in Dowa, pre- and postimplementation.
Effect of intervention on use of family planning and immunization services; Dowa district, March–May 2016 vs. March–May 2017.
| Indicator | Coefficient * | Standard Error | 95% Confidence Interval | Rho |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| New community-based FP users | 12.0 | 2.43 | 7.12–16.86 | 0.328 |
| Total community-based FP users | 186.6 | 23.86 | 138.8–234.4 | 0.350 |
| New facility-based FP users | −9.0 | 5.3 | −19.6–1.5 | 0.376 |
| Total facility-based FP users | −63.3 | 16.3 | −95.9–−30.7 | 0.512 |
| All new FP users | 2.9 | 5.4 | −8.9–13.9 | 0.390 |
| All FP users | 123.3 | 24.5 | 74.2–172.4 | 0.571 |
| DPT1 doses | 3.1 | 2.6 | −2.1–8.2 | 0.875 |
| DPT3 doses | 9.2 | 2.9 | 3.4–15.0 | 0.810 |
FP = family planning; DPT = diphtheria–tetanus–pertussis. * Fixed effects panel regression models were used to estimate coefficients for each indicator. Data were grouped by facility and month.
Figure 3Facility- and community-based depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA) provision, pre- and postimplementation in Dowa.
Figure 4Method mix for total family planning users, pre- and postimplementation in Dowa.
Figure 5Percentage contraceptive methods and immunization doses administered at the community level in Dowa.