| Literature DB >> 34177270 |
Bidusha Neupane1, Sujan Rijal2, Srijana Gc3, Til Bahadur Basnet4,5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: One out of two neonatal deaths and 2 out of 5 maternal deaths occur at home in Nepal. An essential intervention in reducing maternal mortality and neonatal death is institutional delivery. The objective of this study was to find out the external environmental, predisposing, and enabling factors associated with the use of institutional delivery care in Nepal.Entities:
Keywords: Andersen behavioral model; Home delivery; health utilization; institutional delivery
Year: 2021 PMID: 34177270 PMCID: PMC8207282 DOI: 10.1177/11786329211024810
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Health Serv Insights ISSN: 1178-6329
Figure 1.Conceptual framework of Andersen’s behavior model.
Abbreviation: ANC, antenatal care.
Respondent’s characteristics divided into environmental, predisposing and enabling factors.
| Variable | Total (n) | Home delivery n (%) | Institutional delivery n (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| External environmental factor | ||||
| Province | ||||
| Province 1 | 561 | 183 (32.6) | 378 (67.4) | <.001 |
| Province 2 | 717 | 390 (54.4) | 372 (45.6) | |
| Province 3 | 431 | 138 (32) | 293 (68) | |
| Province 4 | 435 | 135 (31) | 300 (69) | |
| Province 5 | 631 | 223 (35.3) | 408 (64.7) | |
| Province 6 | 597 | 295 (49.4) | 302 (50.6) | |
| Province 7 | 527 | 157 (29.8) | 370 (70.2) | |
| Residence | ||||
| Urban | 2282 | 664 (29.1) | 1618 (70.9) | <.001 |
| Rural | 1617 | 857 (53) | 760 (47) | |
| Predisposing factor | ||||
| Age (y) | ||||
| 15-19 | 338 | 101 (29.9) | 237 (70.1) | <.001 |
| 20-29 | 2599 | 971 (37.4) | 1628 (62.6) | |
| 30-49 | 962 | 449 (46.7) | 513 (53.3) | |
| Ethnicity | ||||
| Brahmin/Chettri | 1339 | 422 (31.5) | 917 (68.5) | <.001 |
| Janjati | 1254 | 461 (36.8) | 793 (63.2) | |
| Dalit | 567 | 279 (47.6) | 297 (52.4) | |
| Muslim | 207 | 100 (48.3) | 107 (51.7) | |
| Others | 532 | 268 (50.4) | 264 (49.6) | |
| Religion | ||||
| Hindu | 3401 | 1316 (38.7) | 2085 (61.3) | .291 |
| Non-Hindu | 498 | 205 (41.2) | 293 (58.8) | |
| ANC visit | ||||
| Less than 4 | 1165 | 780 (67) | 385 (33) | <.001 |
| Four or more | 2734 | 741 (27.1) | 1993 (72.9) | |
| Level of education | ||||
| No education | 1190 | 731 (61.4) | 459 (38.6) | <.001 |
| Primary | 738 | 348 (47.2) | 390 (52.8) | |
| Secondary | 1370 | 368 (26.9) | 1002 (73.1) | |
| Higher | 601 | 74 (12.3) | 527 (87.7) | |
| Respondent’s occupation | ||||
| Didn’t work | 1400 | 559 (39.9) | 841 (60.1) | .634 |
| Skilled worker | 456 | 182 (39.9) | 274 (60.1) | |
| Unskilled worker | 109 | 45 (41.3) | 64 (58.7) | |
| Agriculture | 1934 | 735 (38) | 1199 (62) | |
| Enabling factor | ||||
| Wealth index of family | ||||
| Poor | 1849 | 1002 (54.2) | 847 (45.8) | <.001 |
| Middle | 791 | 277 (35) | 514 (65) | |
| Rich | 1259 | 242 (19.2) | 1017 (80.8) | |
| Distance to health facility | ||||
| Big Problem | 2283 | 1080 (47.3) | 1203 (52.7) | <.001 |
| Not a big Problem | 1616 | 441 (27.3) | 1175 (72.7) | |
| Partner’s education status (n = 3886) | ||||
| No education | 488 | 308 (63.2) | 180 (36.8) | <.001 |
| Primary | 816 | 425 (52.8) | 391 (47.9) | |
| Secondary | 1829 | 626 (34.2) | 1203 (65.8) | |
| Higher | 735 | 147 (20) | 588 (80) | |
| Sex of household head | ||||
| Male | 2676 | 1059 (39.6) | 1617 (60.4) | .286 |
| Female | 1223 | 462 (37.8) | 761 (62.2) | |
| Healthcare decision maker (n = 3886) | ||||
| Herself | 835 | 298 (35.7) | 537 (64.3) | .004 |
| Women and someone else | 1120 | 414 (37) | 706 (63) | |
| Others | 1931 | 794 (41.5) | 1119 (58.2) | |
| Exposure to newspaper | ||||
| Not at all | 2939 | 1372 (46.7) | 1567 (53.3) | <.001 |
| Less than once a week | 781 | 138 (17.7) | 643 (82.3) | |
| At least once a week | 179 | 12 (6.1) | 168 (93.9) | |
| Exposure to radio | ||||
| Not at all | 1627 | 759 (46.7) | 868 (53.3) | <.001 |
| Less than once a week | 1252 | 434 (34.7) | 818 (65.3) | |
| At least once a week | 1020 | 328 (32.2) | 692 (67.8) | |
| Exposure to television | ||||
| Not at all | 1481 | 844 (57) | 637 (43) | <.001 |
| Less than once a week | 862 | 328 (38.1) | 534 (61.9) | |
| At least once a week | 1556 | 349 (22.4) | 1207 (77.6) |
Multilevel logistic regression showing hierarchical factors associated with the place of delivery in Andersen’s behavioral model.
| Variables | Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | Model 4 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR (95% CI) | OR (95% CI) | OR (95% CI) | OR (95% CI) | |
| Contextual factors | ||||
| External environmental factor | ||||
| Provinces | ||||
| Province 1 | ||||
| Province 2 | 0.35 (0.19-0.63)
| 0.3 (0.18-0.52)
| 0.46 (0.28-0.76)
| 0.47 (0.28-0.79)
|
| Province 3 | 1.13 (0.72-2.42) | 1.27 (0.74-2.18) | 1.25 (0.75-2.1) | 1.18 (0.69-1.99) |
| Province 4 | 1.24 (0.68-2.3) | 1.13 (0.65-1.94) | 1.05 (0.62-1.76) | 1 (0.59-1.7) |
| Province 5 | 0.97 (0.54-1.73) | 0.87 (0.52-1.44) | 0.89 (0.55-1.44) | 0.92 (0.57-1.5) |
| Province 6 | 0.41 (0.22-0.73)
| 0.6 (0.36-1.02) | 0.76 (0.46-1.25) | 0.78 (0.47-1.31) |
| Province 7 | 0.96 (0.53-1.75) | 1.3 (0.78-2.25) | 1.69 (1.02-2.8)
| 1.76 (1.05-2.94)
|
| Predisposing factor | ||||
| Ethnicity | ||||
| Brahmin/Chettri | ||||
| Janjati | 0.48 (0.37-0.62)
| 0.53 (0.41-0.68)
| 0.73 (0.55-0.96)
| 0.78 (0.59-1.04) |
| Dalit | 0.41 (0.31-0.54)
| 0.57 (0.43-0.77)
| 0.75 (0.55-1.02) | 0.8 (0.58-1.1) |
| Muslim | 0.55 (0.29-1.06) | 0.43 (0.25-0.72)
| 0.97 (0.56-1.66) | 1.1 (0.64-1.9) |
| Others | 0.6 (0.41-0.89)
| 0.51 (0.34-0.75)
| 0.74 (0.49-1.12) | 0.78 (0.52-1.18) |
| Religion | ||||
| Hindu | ||||
| Non-Hindu | 0.99 (0.69-1.44) | |||
| Enabling factors | ||||
| Wealth index of family | ||||
| Poor | ||||
| Rich/middle class | 2.43 (2.04-2.89)
| 2.75 (2.2-3.44)
| 2.32 (1.83-2.94)
| |
| Distance as a problem | ||||
| Yes (r | ||||
| No | 3.49 (2.81-4.32)
| 2.36 (1.97-2.84)
| 2.39 (2-2.88)
| |
| Individual Factors | ||||
| Predisposing factors | ||||
| Age | 0.94 (0.92-0.95)
| 0.94 (0.92-0.95)
| ||
| ANC 4+ visit | ||||
| No ( | ||||
| Yes | 3.36 (2.77-4.08)
| 3.16 (2.6-3.84)
| ||
| Level of education | ||||
| No education | ||||
| Primary school | 1.41 (1.11-1.79)
| 1.28 (1-1.65) | ||
| Secondary school | 2.5 (1.98-3.15)
| 1.99 (1.53-2.58)
| ||
| Higher school | 4.46 (3.13-6.34)
| 3.17 (2.09-4.81)
| ||
| Enabling factors | ||||
| Level of partner’s education | ||||
| No education ( | ||||
| Primary school | 1.12 (0.83-1.52) | |||
| Secondary school | 1.33 (0.99-1.79) | |||
| Higher school | 1.6 (1.08-2.36) | |||
| Healthcare decision maker | ||||
| Herself ( | ||||
| Women and someone else | 0.93 (0.72-1.22) | |||
| Others | 1.1 (0.87-1.39) | |||
| Exposure to newspaper | ||||
| Not at all | ||||
| Less than once a week | 1.2 (0.9-1.59) | |||
| At least once a week | 1.92 (0.92-3.97) | |||
| Exposure to radio | ||||
| Not at all | ||||
| Less than once a week | 1.02 (0.81-1.28) | |||
| At least once a week | 1.98 (0.76-1.26) | |||
| Exposure to television | ||||
| Not at all | ||||
| Less than once a week | 1.07 (0.84-1.36) | |||
| At least once a week | 1.46 (1.14-1.87)
| |||
| Variance at PSU: residence (urban/rural) | 1.699 | 1.125 | 0.865 | 0.863 |
| Variance at the residence (urban/rural) | 0.492 | 0.258 | 0.178 | 0.149 |
| ICC | 0.4 | 0.296 | 0.241 | 0.235 |
Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; ICC, intra class correlation coefficient; OR, odds ratio; PSU; primary sampling unit.
Model 1: mutually adjusted for contextual predisposing variables.
Model 2: mutually adjusted for contextual predisposing and enabling variables.
Model 3: mutually adjusted for contextual predisposing and enabling variables, and individual predisposing variables.
Model 4: mutually adjusted for contextual predisposing and enabling variables, and individual predisposing and enabling variables.
P ⩽ .001.
P ⩽ .01.
P ⩽ .05.