| Literature DB >> 32912244 |
Fentaw Teshome Dagnaw1, Sofonyas Abebaw Tiruneh2, Melkalem Mamuye Azanaw2, Aragaw Tesfaw Desale2, Melaku Tadege Engdaw2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Person-centered maternity care is providing care that is respectful and responsive to individual women's preferences, needs, and values and ensuring that their values guide all clinical decisions during childbirth. Although person-centered health care is one of the factors that increase client satisfaction and increased health service utilization in Ethiopia, little is known about predictors of person-centered maternity care. Therefore, the aim of this study was to identify the determinant factors of person-centered maternity care among mothers who gave birth in selected health facilities in Dessie town, Northeastern, Ethiopia.Entities:
Keywords: Ethiopia; Mother; Person Centered Maternity Care
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32912244 PMCID: PMC7488053 DOI: 10.1186/s12884-020-03221-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Pregnancy Childbirth ISSN: 1471-2393 Impact factor: 3.007
Fig. 1The conceptual framework for the predictors of Person Centered Maternity Care [4, 11–17].
Socio-demographic characteristics of respondents in Dessie town, Northeast Ethiopia, 2019 (n = 310)
| Variables | Category | Frequency | Percentage (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Residence | Urban | 223 | 71.9 |
| Rural | 87 | 28.1 | |
| Age of mothers | 16–19 | 15 | 4.8 |
| 20–29 | 196 | 63.2 | |
| ≥ 30 | 99 | 31.9 | |
| Marital status | Currently married | 280 | 90.3 |
| Currently unmarried | 30 | 9.7 | |
| Mother’s religion | Muslim | 189 | 61 |
| Orthodox Christian | 104 | 33.5 | |
| Protestant | 12 | 3.9 | |
| Catholic | 5 | 1.6 | |
| Level of education | Unable to read and write | 51 | 16.4 |
| Primary level (1–8 grades) | 105 | 33.9 | |
| Secondary and above | 154 | 49.7 | |
| Employment status | Unemployed | 240 | 77.4 |
| Employed | 70 | 22.6 | |
| Income (in Ethiopian Birr) | ≤ 3000 | 159 | 51.3 |
| > 3000 | 151 | 48.7 | |
Obstetric characteristics of respondents in Dessie town, Northeast Ethiopia, 2019
| Variables | Category | Frequency | Percentage (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Antenatal care | Yes | 305 | 98.4 |
| No | 5 | 1.6 | |
| Frequency of ANC | ≤ 4 | 236 | 77.4 |
| > 4 | 69 | 22.6 | |
| Place of ANC | Government health institution | 199 | 65.2 |
| Private health institution | 106 | 34.8 | |
| Parity | Primiparous | 137 | 44.2 |
| Multiparous | 173 | 55.8 | |
| Total number of facility-based childbirth | ≤ 2 | 255 | 82.3 |
| 3–4 | 53 | 17.1 | |
| > 4 | 2 | 0.6 | |
| Place of last delivery | Government health institutions | 251 | 81 |
| Private health institutions | 59 | 19 | |
| Profession of delivery attendant | Doctor | 130 | 41.9 |
| Midwife | 159 | 51.6 | |
| Others (Nurse, HEW) | 20 | 6.5 | |
| Sex of main provider | Male | 186 | 60 |
| Female | 102 | 32.6 | |
| Both | 23 | 7.4 | |
| Type of last delivery | Normal delivery | 162 | 52.3 |
| Cesarean delivery | 45 | 14.5 | |
| Instrumental | 103 | 33.2 | |
| Time of delivery | Day time | 153 | 49.4 |
| Night time | 157 | 50.6 | |
| Complication during delivery | Yes, for self | 36 | 11.6 |
| Yes, for baby | 35 | 11.3 | |
| Yes, for both self and baby | 19 | 6.1 | |
| No | 220 | 71 | |
| Newborn outcome | Alive | 302 | 97.4 |
| Dead | 8 | 2.6 |
Fig. 2Distribution of percentage mean score of PCMC full scale and sub scales from the total expected score among mothers of Dessie town, 2019.
Distribution of dignity and respect items (n = 310), Dessie Town, 2019
| Items | No, never (%) | Yes, few times (%) | Yes, most of the time (%) | Yes, all the time (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Treatment with respect | 4 (1.3) | 53 (17.1) | 153 (46.1) | 110 (35.5) |
| Treatment in a friendly manner | 11 (3.5) | 75 (24.2) | 140 (45.2) | 84 (27.1) |
Providers shouted, scolded, insulted, threatened, or talked rudely during treatment (Verbal abuse) (RC) | 239 (77.1) | 56 (18.1)a | 15 (4.8) | 0 |
| Providers treated me roughly like pushed, beaten, slapped, pinched, and physically restrained (Physical abuse) (RC) | 275 (88.7) | 21 (6.8)a | 14(4.5) | 0 |
| Feeling of other people not involved in care could hear the discussion with health care provider (Auditory privacy) (RC) | 263 (84.8) | 37 (11.9) | 7(2.3) | 3 (1) |
Feel health information was/will be kept confidential (Record confidentiality) | 10 (3.2) | 10 (3.2) | 165 (53.2) | 125 (40.3) |
aShows that Yes, few times changed into Yes, onceRC Reverse Coded
Distribution of communication and autonomy items, Dessie Town, 2019 (n = 310)
| Items | No, never (%) | Yes, few times (%) | Yes, most of the time (%) | Yes, all the time (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Providers introduced themselvesa | 200 (64.5) | 53 (17.1) | 37 (11.9) | 20 (6.5) |
| Providers called me by my namea | 51 (16.5) | 58 (18.7) | 125 (40.3) | 76 (24.5) |
| Feel involved in decisions about my care | 25 (8.1) | 77 (24.8) | 162 (52.3) | 46 (14.8) |
| Consent to examinations and procedures | 46 (14.8) | 80 (25.8) | 116 (37.4) | 68 (21.9) |
| Allowed position of choice | 22 (7.1) | 83 (26.8) | 138 (44.5) | 67(21.6) |
| Spoken in a language I understand | 4 (1.3) | 33 (10.6) | 77 (24.8) | 196 (63.2) |
| Examinations and procedures were explained | 38 (12.3) | 93 (30) | 119 (38.4) | 60 (19.4) |
| Purpose of medicines was explained# | 27 (8.7) | 97 (31.3) | 136 (43.9) | 44 (14.2) |
Feel comfortable to ask questions I had to Providers | 11(3.5) | 69 (22.3) | 126 (40.6) | 104 (33.5) |
aThe choice of the item was changed into (No, none of them, Yes, few of them, Yes, most of them and Yes, all of them) #Did not get any medicine 6 (1.9%)
Distribution of supportive care items, Dessie Town, 2019 (n = 310)
| Items | No, never (%) | Yes, few times (%) | Yes, most of the time (%) | Yes, all the time (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Allowed a labor companiona | 144 (46.5) | 49 (15.8) | 56 (18.1) | 55 (17.7) |
| Allowed a delivery companion | 216 (69.7) | 38 (12.3) | 37 (11.9) | 19 (6.1) |
| Providers talk to me about how I was feeling | 20 (6.5) | 62 (20) | 160 (51.6) | 68 (21.9) |
| Providers supported me when I had anxieties and fears | 22 (7.1) | 54 (17.4) | 159 (51.3) | 75 (24.2) |
| Feel providers did their best to control my pain | 17 (5.5) | 56 (18.1) | 138 (44.5) | 99 (31.9) |
| Providers paid attention when I needed help | 11 (3.5) | 60 (19.4) | 130 (41.9) | 109 (35.2) |
| Feel providers took the best care of me | 11 (3.5) | 52 (16.8) | 148 (47.7) | 99 (31.9) |
| Trust providers with regards to my care | 4 (1.3) | 54 (17.4) | 135 (43.5) | 117 (37.7) |
| Feel there were enough providers to care for me | 10 (3.2) | 67 (21.6) | 119 (38.4) | 114 (36.8) |
| Feel facility was crowded (RC) | 94 (30.3) | 65 (21) | 99 (31.9) | 52 (16.8) |
| Facility had water | 33 (10.6) | 58 (18.7) | 74 (23.9) | 145 (46.8) |
| Facility had electricity | 2 (0.6) | 25 (8.1) | 48 (15.5) | 235 (75.8) |
| Feel safe in the facility | 11 (3.5) | 54 (17.4) | 156 (50.3) | 89 (28.7) |
| Feeling about waiting time | Very long (%) | Somewhat long (%) | Little long (%) | Very short (%) |
| 39 (12.6) | 91 (29.4) | 109 (35.2) | 71 (22.9) | |
| Thinking the general environment of the health facility; the facility was | Very dirty (%) | Dirty (%) | Clean (%) | Very clean (%) |
| 11 (3.5) | 54 (17.4) | 203 (65.5) | 42 (13.5) |
aI did not want someone to stay with me 6 (1.9%)RC Reverse Coded
Multivariable regression analysis factors for Person Centered Maternity Care scale, Northeast Ethiopia, 2019
| Variables | Category | Unstandardized Adjusted β Coefficients | 95% CI of β |
|---|---|---|---|
| (Constant) | 71.4 | (67.70, 75.10) *** | |
| Residence | Urban | 0 | |
| Rural | -4.12 | (-7.60, -0.67) * | |
| Level of education | Secondary and above | 0 | |
| Unable to read and write | -4.21 | (-8.80, 0.40) | |
| primary Level (1–8 grades) | -2.64 | (-6.10, 0.78) | |
| Employment status | Non-employer | 0 | |
| Employer | 2.88 | (-0.68, 6.44) | |
| Income | > 3000 ETB | 0 | |
| ≤ 3000 ETB | -6.2 | (-9.40, -3.04) *** | |
| ANC follow-up | No | -4.38 | (-16.30, 7.50) |
| Yes | 0 | ||
| Place of ANC | Government health institutions | 0 | |
| Private health institutions | -2.07 | (-7.90, 3.70) | |
| Place of delivery | Government health institutions | 0 | |
| Private health institutions | 14.13 | (7.70, 20.60) *** | |
| Mode of delivery | SVD | 0 | |
| Cesarean section | 2.74 | (-2.30, 7.80) | |
| Instrumental | -3.17 | (-6.50, 0.15) | |
| Time of delivery | Day | 0 | |
| Night | -2.98 | (-5.90, -0.06) * | |
| Outcome of delivery | Alive | 0 | |
| Dead | -12.7 | (-21.80, -3.50) ** | |
| Sex of main delivery attendant | Male | 0 | |
| Female | 2.92 | (-0.31, 6.14) | |
| Both | 3.20 | (-2.30, 8.80) | |
| Length of stay at the health facility | ≤ 1 day | 0 | |
| 2-7days | -5.07 | (-9.20, -0.92) * | |
| Greater than one week | -5.58 | (-13.30, 2.12) |
NB: CI Confidence Interval, * = significant at P-value < 0.05, ** - significant at P-value < 0.01*** = significant at P-value < 0.001, ETB Ethiopian Birr