Sialubanje Cephas, Massar Karlijn, Hamer Davidson H, Ruiter Robert A C
Ministry of Health, Monze District Medical Office, P.O. Box 660144, Monze, Zambia.
Department of Work and Social Psychology, Maastricht University, P.O. Box 616, 6200MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2017 May 4;17(1):136. doi: 10.1186/s12884-017-1317-5.
Although the association between the presence of maternity waiting homes (MWHs) and the personal and environmental factors that affect the use of MWHs has been explained in qualitative terms, it has never been tested in quantitative terms. The aim of this study was to test the association between the presence of MWHs and personal and environmental factors that affect the use of MWHs.
A cross-sectional study was conducted using an interviewer-administered questionnaire from 1 July to 31 August, 2014 among 340 women of reproductive age in 15 rural health centres in Kalomo district, Zambia. Tests of association (chi square, logistic regression analysis, odds ratio) were conducted to determine the strength of the association between the presence of MWHs and personal and environmental factors. Differences between respondents who used MWHs and those who did not were also tested.
Compared to respondents from health centres without MWHs, those from centres with MWHs had higher odds of expressing willingness to use MWHs (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 4.58; 95% confidence interval [CI]:1.39-15.17), perceived more benefits from using a MWH (aOR =8.63; 95% CI: 3.13-23.79), perceived more social pressure from important others to use MWH (aOR =27.09; 95% CI: 12.23-60.03) and higher personal risk from pregnancy and childbirth related complications (aOR =11.63; 95% CI: 2.52-53.62). Furthermore, these respondents had higher odds of staying at a health centre before delivery (aOR =1.78; 95% CI: 1.05-3.02), giving birth at a health facility (aOR = 3.36; 95% CI: 1.85-6.12) and receiving care from a skilled birth attendant (aOR =3.24; 95% CI: 1.80-5.84). In contrast, these respondents had lower odds of perceiving barriers regarding the use of MWHs (aOR =0.27; 95% CI: 0.16-0.47). Factors positively associated with the use of MWHs included longer distances to the nearest health centre (p = 0.004), higher number of antenatal care (ANC) visits (p = 0.001), higher proportions of complications during ANC (p = 0.09) and women's perception of benefits gained from staying in a MWH while waiting for delivery at the health centre (p = 0.001).
These findings suggest a need for health interventions that focus on promoting ANC use, raising awareness about the risk and severity of pregnancy complications, promoting family and community support, and mitigating logistical barriers.
尽管产妇候产之家(MWHs)的存在与影响其使用的个人及环境因素之间的关联已有定性解释,但从未进行过定量检验。本研究的目的是检验MWHs的存在与影响其使用的个人及环境因素之间的关联。
2014年7月1日至8月31日,在赞比亚卡洛莫区15个农村卫生中心对340名育龄妇女进行了一项横断面研究,采用由访谈员实施的问卷调查。进行了关联性检验(卡方检验、逻辑回归分析、比值比)以确定MWHs的存在与个人及环境因素之间关联的强度。还对使用MWHs的受访者与未使用MWHs的受访者之间的差异进行了检验。
与没有MWHs的卫生中心的受访者相比,有MWHs的卫生中心的受访者表示愿意使用MWHs的几率更高(调整后的比值比[aOR]=4.58;95%置信区间[CI]:1.39 - 15.17),认为使用MWHs有更多益处(aOR = 8.63;95% CI:3.13 - 23.79),感觉到重要他人使用MWHs的社会压力更大(aOR = 27.09;95% CI:12.23 - 60.03),以及因妊娠和分娩相关并发症而面临的个人风险更高(aOR = 11.63;95% CI:2.52 - 53.62)。此外,这些受访者在分娩前留在卫生中心的几率更高(aOR = 1.78;95% CI:1.05 - 3.02),在医疗机构分娩的几率更高(aOR = 3.36;95% CI:1.