| Literature DB >> 33072367 |
Kennedy Diema Konlan1, Joel Afram Saah2, Roberta Mensima Amoah2, Abdul Razak Doat3, Iddrisu Mohammed3, Juliana Asibi Abdulai4, Kennedy Dodam Konlan5.
Abstract
Aim: To assess the factors that influence the utilization of FANC services among pregnant women. Methodology: A cross-sectional quantitative study conducted among 210 postnatal women in Ho Teaching Hospital. Data were entered into Microsoft excel, cleaned and transported to SPSS and analysed. Cross tabulations were used to explore associations between variables.Entities:
Keywords: antenatal; factors; focused antenatal care; influencing; maternal health; pregnancy; utilization
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33072367 PMCID: PMC7544877 DOI: 10.1002/nop2.569
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nurs Open ISSN: 2054-1058
Demographic characteristics (N = 210)
| Variables | Characteristics |
| %. |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age | 16–20 | 43 | 20.5 |
| 21–25 | 62 | 29.5 | |
| 26–30 | 55 | 26.2 | |
| 31–35 | 36 | 17.1 | |
| 36–40 | 14 | 6.7 | |
| Marital Status | Married | 100 | 47.6 |
| Single | 49 | 23.3 | |
| Divorced | 16 | 7.6 | |
| Widowed | 4 | 1.9 | |
| Cohabiting | 41 | 19.5 | |
| Ethnic Group | Ewe | 123 | 58.6 |
| Akan | 39 | 18.6 | |
| Ga‐Adangbe | 24 | 11.4 | |
| Other | 24 | 11.4 | |
| Religion | Christian | 155 | 73.8 |
| Islam | 27 | 12.9 | |
| Traditional African | 19 | 9.1 | |
| Other | 9 | 4.3 | |
| Educational Level | Primary | 56 | 26.7 |
| Junior high school | 56 | 26.7 | |
| Senior high school | 36 | 17.1 | |
| Tertiary | 26 | 12.4 | |
| None | 36 | 17.1 | |
| Occupation | Business | 38 | 18.1 |
| Trader | 97 | 46.2 | |
| Farmer | 12 | 5.7 | |
| Student | 11 | 5.2 | |
| Civil servant | 22 | 10.5 | |
| Other | 30 | 14.3 | |
| Partner Occupation | Business | 29 | 20.6 |
| Civil servant | 50 | 35.5 | |
| Farmer | 27 | 19.2 | |
| Student | 8 | 5.7 | |
| Parity | One | 63 | 30 |
| Two | 71 | 33.8 | |
| Three | 39 | 18.6 | |
| Four | 23 | 11.0 | |
| More than four | 14 | 6.7 |
Knowledge on FANC (N = 210)
| Responses |
| % |
|---|---|---|
| Definition Of FANC | ||
| Evidence‐based and goal directed, family‐centred and quality rather than quantity of visits | 66 | 31.4 |
| Individualized care with high quantity of care | 45 | 21.4 |
| No idea | 99 | 47.2 |
| Sources Of Information | ||
| Midwife | 57 | 51.4 |
| Radio | 20 | 18 |
| Traditional birth attendants | 0 | 0 |
| Relatives | 21 | 18.9 |
| Others | 13 | 11.7 |
| Reason For Visit | ||
| When there is a problem | 43 | 20.5 |
| When there is no problem | 111 | 52.9 |
| No response | 56 | 26.6 |
| Benefits Of FANC | ||
| Establishing rapport between pregnant mother and antenatal care provider | 68 | 61.3 |
| For early detection of risks associated with pregnancy | 69 | 62.2 |
| Assist the provider to give individualized health education on the importance of FANC | 72 | 64.9 |
| To receive preventive interventions such as tetanus immunizations, iron and folic acid supplementation, malaria treatment (SP), insecticide‐treated bed nets. | 83 | 74.8 |
Association of demographic factors and the utilization of FANC by postnatal women (N = 210)
| Responses | Had less than 4 ANC attendance (<4) | Had 4 or more ANC attencace (≥4) |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Age | |||
| 16–20 | 32 (19.28) | 11 (25.0) | .028 |
| 21–25 | 55 (33.1) | 7 (15.9) | |
| 26–30 | 44 (26.5 | 11 (25.0) | |
| 31–35 | 28 (16.9) | 8 (18.2) | |
| 36–40 | 7 (4.2) | 7 (15.9) | |
| Marital status | |||
| Married | 76 (45.8) | 24 (54.5) | .460 |
| Single | 40 (24.1) | 9 (20.5) | |
| Divorced | 15 (9.0) | 1 (2.3) | |
| Widowed | 4 (2.4) | 0 (0.0) | |
| Cohabiting | 31 (18.7) | 10 (22.7) | |
| Ethnic distribution | |||
| Ewe | 94 (56.6) | 29 (65.9) | .357 |
| Akan | 32 (19.3) | 7 (15.9) | |
| Ga‐Adangbe | 22 (13.3) | 2 (4.5) | |
| Other | 18 (10.8) | 6 (13.6) | |
| Religion | |||
| Christian | 118 (71.1) | 37 (84.1) | .327 |
| Traditional African | 23 (13.9) | 4 (9.1) | |
| Islam | 16 (6.6) | 3 (6.8) | |
| Other | 9 (5.4) | 0 (0.0) | |
| Education | |||
| Primary | 50 (30.1) | 6 (13.6) | .003 |
| Junior High | 50 (30.1) | 6 (13.6) | |
| Secondary | 23 (13.9) | 13 (29.6) 8 (18.2) | |
| Tertiary | 18 (10.8) 25 (15.1) | 11 (25.0) | |
| None | |||
| Occupation | |||
| Business | 33 (19.8) | 5 (11.4) | .003 |
| Trader | 72 (43.4) | 25 (56.8) | |
| Farming | 12 (7.2) | 0 (0.0) | |
| Student | 5 (3.0) | 6 (13.6) | |
| Civil Servant | 16 (9.6) | 6 (13.6) | |
| Others | 28 (16.8) | 2 (4.6) | |
| Partners’ occupation | |||
| Business | 21 (19.6) | 8 (23.5) | .149 |
| Civil Servant | 34 (31.8) | 16 (47.1) | |
| Farming | 23 (21.5) | 4 (11.7) | |
| Student | 5 (4.8) | 3 (8.8) | |
| Other | 24 (22.4) | 3 (8.8) | |
| Parity | |||
| One | 43 (25.9) | 20 (45.5) | .003 |
| Two | 66 (39.8) | 5 (11.4) | |
| Three | 30 (18.1) | 9 (20.5) | |
| Four | 17 (10.2) | 6 (13.6) | |
| More than four | 10 (6.0) | 4 (9.1) | |
| Number of children alive | |||
| One | 51 (30.7) | 23 (52.3) | .000 |
| Two | 65 (39.1) | 3 (6.8) | |
| Three | 25 (15.1) | 9 (20.5) | |
| Four | 16 (9.6) | 5 (11.4) | |
| More than four | 9 (5.4) | 4 (9.1) | |
Socio‐cultural factors associated with utilization of FANC (N = 210)
| Variable | Number of ANC attendance |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| Had less than 4 ANC attendance (<4) | Had 4 or more ANC attendance (≥4) | ||
| Transport money | 1 (0.6) | 0 (0.0) | .000 |
| Long distance | 8 (4.8) | 1 (2.3) | .000 |
| Desirability | 1 (0.6) | 0 (0.0) | .000 |
| Need permission to start FANC | 24 (54.6) | 11 (6.6) | .000 |
| Concern that there may not be a midwife | 1 (2.3) | 0 (0.0) | .000 |
| Limited transportation options | 5 (3.0) | 0 (0.0) | .000 |
| Fear that witches may terminate the pregnancy | 9 (5.4) | 0 (0.0) | .000 |
| Long waiting hours | 6 (3.6) | 0 (0.0) | .000 |
| No knowledge | 14 (8.4) | 0 (0.0) | .000 |
| No time | 6 (3.6) | 0 (0.0) | .000 |
| Poor amenities at the facility | 0 (0.0) | 2 (4.6) | .000 |
| Poor staff attitude | 7 (4.2) | 4 (9.1) | .000 |
| Shyness | 7 (4.2) | 0 (0.0) | .000 |
| No barriers | 91 (54.8) | 12 (27.3) | .000 |