scholarly journals Effects of mother related factors on perinatal outcomes-a study of mothers seeking antenatal care at public and non-public health facilities in Kisii County, Kenya

Author(s):  
Micah Matiang’i ◽  
Simon Karanja ◽  
Peter Wanzala ◽  
Kenneth Ngure ◽  
Albino Luciani

The study sought to determine clientlevel and facility-level factors that affect perinatal outcomes among women attending comparable public (government owned) and non-public health facilities (non-government owned) in Kisii County-Kenya in the context of free maternity care. A total of 365 pregnant mothers recruited in 4 health facilities during their ANC visit and followed up to 2 weeks post-delivery but only 287 attended all follow-up visits. Study subjects were recruited proportionate to number of deliveries each of the facilities had conducted in the preceding 6 months. The dependent variable was perinatal outcome; independent variables were demographic and clinical factors. Analysis was done using χ2, logistic regression, paired t and McNemar’s tests. Maternal BMI and a mother’s parity were statistically correlated with perinatal outcome (χ2= 8.900, d.f =3, P=0.031 and (χ2= 13.232, d.f =4, P=0.039) respectively. Mothers with 1 parity were 4.5 times more likely to have normal perinatal outcomes (OR =4.5, 95% CI 2.25-14.29, P=0.012). There was a significant relationship between a mother’s knowledge of pregnancy-related issues and the baby’s weight (t=-67.8 d.f. 213 P<0.001). Mothers’ knowledge on pregnancy issues and spousal involvement influences perinatal outcomes. Dietary Diversity Score (DDS) of a mother does not have a direct influence on the outcome of a pregnancy. There is need to focus on maternal factors that affect perinatal outcomes besides free maternity care.

BMC Nutrition ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Negassie Berhe Weldehaweria ◽  
Kebede Haile Misgina ◽  
Meresa Gebremedhin Weldu ◽  
Yosef Sibhatu Gebregiorgis ◽  
Berhane Hailu Gebrezgi ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Achenef Asmamaw Muche ◽  
Oladapo O. Olayemi ◽  
Yigzaw Kebede Gete

Abstract Background Globally, Gestational Diabetes Mellitus (GDM) is rising, but it is a neglected health threat to mothers and their children in low resource countries. Although, GDM is known in Ethiopia, information regarding it remains scarce by recent diagnostic criteria. Therefore, this study aimed to determine the prevalence of GDM and associated factors among women attending antenatal care at Gondar town public health facilities, Northwest Ethiopia. Methods A cross-sectional study was conducted among 1027 pregnant women selected by the systematic random sampling technique. The universal one-step screening and diagnostic strategy was done using a two-hour 75 g oral glucose tolerance test. GDM was diagnosed using updated diagnostic criteria (2017 American Diabetes Association (ADA) or 2013 World Health Organization (WHO) or modified International Association of the Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups diagnostic criteria (IADPSG)). Binary logistic regression model was used to identify factors associated with GDM. Results Of the total 1027 pregnant women, 12.8% (95% CI: 10.8–14.8) were diagnosed with GDM. Overweight and/or obesity (MUAC ≥28 cm) (AOR = 2.25, 95% CI: 1.18–4.26), previous history of GDM (AOR = 5.82, 95% CI: 2.57–13.18), family history of diabetes (AOR = 4.03, 95% CI: 1.57–10.35), low physical activity (AOR = 3.36, 95% CI: 1.60–7.04), inadequate dietary diversity (AOR = 1.9, 95% CI: 1.02–3.53), and antenatal depression (AOR = 4.12, 95% CI: 1.85–9.20) were significantly associated with GDM. Conclusions The prevalence of GDM among women attending antenatal care at Gondar town public health facilities was high. Previous history of GDM, antenatal depression, family history of diabetes, low physical activity, overweight and/or obesity and inadequate dietary diversity were significantly associated with GDM. Routine screening of pregnant women and healthy lifestyle are strongly recommended.


2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (Suppl 4) ◽  
pp. e005191
Author(s):  
Linda Alinafe Sande ◽  
Katleho Matsimela ◽  
Lawrence Mwenge ◽  
Collin Mangenah ◽  
Augustine Talumba Choko ◽  
...  

IntroductionAs countries approach the UNAIDS 95-95-95 targets, there is a need for innovative and cost-saving HIV testing approaches that can increase testing coverage in hard-to-reach populations. The HIV Self-Testing Africa-Initiative distributed HIV self-test (HIVST) kits using unincentivised HIV testing counsellors across 31 public facilities in Malawi, South Africa, Zambia and Zimbabwe. HIVST was distributed either through secondary (partner’s use) distribution alone or primary (own use) and secondary distribution approaches.MethodsWe evaluated the costs of adding HIVST to existing HIV testing from the providers’ perspective in the 31 public health facilities across the four countries between 2018 and 2019. We combined expenditure analysis and bottom-up costing approaches. We also carried out time-and-motion studies on the counsellors to estimate the human resource costs of introducing and demonstrating how to use HIVST for primary and secondary use.ResultsA total of 41 720 kits were distributed during the analysis period, ranging from 1254 in Zimbabwe to 27 678 in Zambia. The cost per kit distributed through the primary distribution approach was $4.27 in Zambia and $9.24 in Zimbabwe. The cost per kit distributed through the secondary distribution approach ranged from $6.46 in Zambia to $13.42 in South Africa, with a wider variation in the average cost at facility-level. From the time-and-motion observations, the counsellors spent between 20% and 44% of the observed workday on HIVST. Overall, personnel and test kit costs were the main cost drivers.ConclusionThe average costs of distributing HIVST kits were comparable across the four countries in our analysis despite wide cost variability within countries. We recommend context-specific exploration of potential efficiency gains from these facility-level cost variations and demand creation activities to ensure continued affordability at scale.


2021 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-15
Author(s):  
May Sudhinaraset ◽  
Katie Giessler ◽  
Michelle Kao Nakphong ◽  
Kali Prosad Roy ◽  
Ananta Basudev Sahu ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document