FACTORS AFFECTING UTILIZATION OF ANTENATAL CARE: THE OPINION OF PREGNANT WOMEN
Keywords:
Antenatal care, Parity, Primipara, Multipara, Safe Motherhood, Health FacilityAbstract
Background: Antenatal care is one of the four pillar initiatives of the Safe Motherhood. This study was carried out to identify the factors affecting the utilization of antenatal care by expectant women of child bearing age and women’s opinion regarding antenatal care. Methods: A cross-sectional questionnaire based survey was conducted from October 2009 to April 2010 at Civil Hospital, Karachi where 250 pregnant women were included who registered for antenatal care after 14 weeks of gestation. Miscarriages during the study were excluded. The subjects were further classified on basis of residential, education status, and number of visits they paid for antenatal care. Results: There were 250 subjects who used preterm delivery antenatal care, and those who followed excess, standard and fewer visits were 125 (60%), 62 (29%), and 63 (30%) respectively. Multipara, urban residents, and well-educated women showed high number of standard visits. Women who were already diagnosed to have antenatal problems (46%) paid standard visits and previous negative birth experience (50%) paid excess visits. The parity levels were significantly correlated with level of education (r=0.5−0.8) and residential status (r=0.6−0.8). Conclusion: The inadequate use of antenatal care is associated with high parity, low education and poor socioeconomic conditions. Public awareness programme for better antenatal standards is suggested.
Downloads
References
2. Fekede B, G/Mariam A. Antenatal care services Utilization and factors associated in Jimma Town (South West Ethiopia). Ethiop Med J 2007;45:123−33.
3. Abou-Zahr CL, Wardlaw T. Antenatal care in developing countries: Promises, achievements and missed opportunities: an analysis of trends, levels and differentials, 1990−2001. Geneva, WHO; 2003.
4. Villar J, Ba’aqeel H, Piaggio G, Lumbiganon P, Miguel Belizán J, Farnot U, et al. Antenatal Care Trial Research Group: WHO antenatal care randomized trial for the evaluation of a new model of routine antenatal care. Lancet 2001;357(9268): 1551−64.
5. Carroli G, Villar J, Piaggio G, Khan ND, Gulmezoglu M, Mugford M, et al. WHO Antenatal care Trail Research Group: WHO systematic review of randomized controlled trials of routine antenatal care. Lancet 2001;357(9268):1565−70.
6. Yousif EM, Abdul Hafeez AR. The effect of antenatal care on the probability of neonatal survival at birth, Wad Medani Teaching Hospital Sudan. Sudanese Journal of Public Health 2006;1(4):293−7.
7. WHO, UNICEF. Antenatal Care in developing Countries: Promises, Achievements and Missed Opportunities: An Analysis of Trends, Levels, and Differentials: 1990−2001. Geneva, New York: WHO & UNICEF; 2003.
8. Low P, Paterson J, Wouldes T, Carter S, Williams M, Percival T. Factors affecting antenatal care attendance by mothers of Pacific infants living in New Zealand. N Z Med J 2005;118:1216.
9. Okunlola MA, Owonikoko KM, Fawole AO, Adekunle AO. Gestational age at antenatal booking and delivery outcome. Afr J Med Sci 2008;37(2):165−9.
10. Anand S, Barnighausen T. Human resources and health outcome: cross-country econometric study. Lancet 2004;364(9445): 1603−9.
11. The WHO Reproductive Health Library. Alternative versus standard packages of antenatal care for low-risk pregnancy. RHL commentary by Mathai M. http://apps.who.int/rhl/ pregnancy_childbirth/antenatal_care/general/cd000934_mathaim_com/en/index.html
12. Swedish Federation of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Antenatal statistics. [Retrieved from http://ww.sfog.se]
13. Navaneetham K, Dharmalingam A. Utilization of maternal health care services in Southern India. Soc Sci Med 2002;55(10):1849–69.
14. Anita G, Pragti C, Kannan A, Gayatri S. Determinants of utilization pattern of antenatal and delivery services in an urbanized village of East Delhi. Indian J Prev Soc Med 2010;41:(3 and 4):240−5.
15. Ukwuma MC. Multiparity and childbirth complications in rural women of Northeastern Nigerian origin. JPBS 2012;2(3):1−4.
16. Toan KT, Chuc TKN, Hinh DN, Eriksson B, Goran B, Karin G, et al. Urban-rural disparities in antenatal care utilization: a study of two cohorts of pregnant women in Vietnam. BMC Health Serv Res 2011;11:120.
17. Kishk NA. Knowledge, attitudes and practices of women towards antenatal care: rural-urban comparison. J Egypt Public Health Assoc 2002;77(5−6):479−98.
18. Backe B. Overutilization of antenatal care in Norway. Scand J Public Health 201’29:129−32.
19. Ware H. Effects of maternal education, women’s roles, and child care on child mortality. Population and Development Review 1984;10(Supplement):191−214.
20. Simkhada B, VanTeijlingen ER, Porter M, Simkhada P. Factors affecting the utilization of antenatal care in developing countries: systematic review of the literature. J Adv Nurs 2008;61(3):244−60.
21. Kiely JL, Michael D, Kogan M. Prenatal care, reproductive health of women. URL: http://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/ ProductsPubs/DatatoAction/pdf/rhow8.pdf
22. Achadi E, Scott S, Pambudi ES, Makowiecka K, Marshall T, Adisasmita A, et al. Midwifery provision and uptake of maternity care in Indonesia. Tro Med Int Health 2007;12(12):1490−7.
23. Titaley CR, Dibely MJ, Roberts CL. Factors associated with non-utilization of postnatal care services Indonesia. J Epidemiol Community Health 2009;63(10)827−31.
24. Bloom S, Lippeveld T, Wypij D. Does antenatal care make a difference to safe delivery? A study in Uttar Pradesh, India Health Policy 2007;14(1):38−48.
25. World Health Organization. Neonatal and perinatal mentality: country, regional and global estimates. World Health Organization, 2006.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Pakistan Journal of Physiology, Pak J Physiol, PJP is FREE for research and academic purposes. It can be freely downloaded and stored, printed, presented, cited and quoted with full reference of, and acknowledgement to the PJP.
