Menu
Menu
Menu
Menu
Introduction Peri-urban settings have high maternal mortality and the quality of care received in different types of health facilities is varied. Yet few studies have explored the construct of person-centered maternity care (PCMC) within peri-urban settings. Understanding women’s experience of maternity care in peri-urban settings will allow health facility managers and policy makers to improve services in these settings. This study examines factors associated with PCMC in a peri-urban setting in Kenya. Methods and materials We analyzed data from a cross-sectional study with 307 women aged 18–49 years who had delivered a baby within the preceding six weeks. Women were recruited from public (n = 118), private (n = 76), and faith based (n = 113) health facilities. We measured PCMC using the 30-item validated PCMC scale which evaluates women’s experiences of dignified and respectful care, supportive care, and communication and autonomy. Factors associated with PCMC were evaluated using multilevel models, with women nested within facilities. Results The average PCMC score was 58.2 (SD = 13.66) out of 90. Controlling for other factors, literate women had, on average, about 6-point higher PCMC scores than women who were not literate (β = 5.758, p = 0.006). Women whose first antenatal care (ANC) visit was in the second (β = -5.030, p = 0.006) and third trimester (β = -7.288, p = 0.003) had lower PCMC scores than those whose first ANC were in the first trimester. Women who were assisted by an unskilled attendant or an auxiliary nurse/midwife at birth had lower PCMC than those assisted by a nurse, midwife or clinical officer (β = -8.962, p = 0.016). Women who were interviewed by phone (β = -7.535, p = 0.006) had lower PCMC scores than those interviewed in person. Conclusions Factors associated with PCMC include literacy, ANC timing and duration, and delivery provider. There is a need to improve PCMC in these settings as part of broader quality improvement activities to improve maternal and neonatal health.
This study is a cross-sectional study on perceived quality of maternity care in the peri-urban setting of Embakasi within Nairobi City in Kenya. Nairobi County is the most populous county in Kenya with a population of close to 4.4 million [26]. Embakasi area is the most populous area within Nairobi, with 5 sub-counties and a population of almost one million people [27]. The area is characterized by low-income housing and informal settlements with poor access to water and waste disposal. The largest garbage dumping site for the city of Nairobi is situated in one of the sub-counties of Embakasi. The health system within Embakasi consists of public hospitals, health centers, and several private and faith-based health facilities. Study data were collected between January and May 2020. In order to reflect women’s experiences across all types of health facilities in the area, women were recruited from three types of health facilities: public, private, and faith-based facilities. The women were recruited using a multistage purposive sampling approach from the sub-County level. First, the Embakasi area was divided into its constituent sub-Counties. We then selected health facilities that were representative of the different types of health facilities in each sub-County. With the assistance of health facility management, women aged between 18 and 49 years, who had delivered within six weeks preceding the study were recruited at postnatal clinics. All women provided written or verbal informed consent to be interviewed. The interviews were conducted by the first author and three research assistants who were trained in research ethics and study procedures in either English or Swahili, depending upon participant preference. Interviews were conducted in private spaces at the respective health facilities, by phone, or in the respondent’s community. Variation in location of data collection was due to restrictions in movement due to COVID-19, and other logistical concerns. 320 women were approached for the interviews and 307 agreed to be interviewed representing a response rate of 96%. The women were compensated $10 for the interview to cover transportation costs to the interview venue. Ethics approval for the study was provided by the Strathmore University Institutional Ethics Review Committee (SU-IERC) and the University of Notre Dame Institutional Review Board. The study was also approved by the National Commission for Science and Technology (NACOSTI) and the Director of health services in the sub-county. The PCMC scale is a validated 30-item scale with three sub-scales for i) dignity and respect, ii) communication and autonomy, and iii) supportive care. Each item is on a 4-point response scale with response options as “no, never” (coded 0), “yes, a few times” (1), “yes, most of the time” (2), and “yes all the time” (3). The full list of items is provided in additional file 1. Prior validation showed the scale has high content, construct, and criterion validity and with good internal consistency reliability [16]. Cronbach’s alpha for the 30 items is 0.89. Summing response to the items (after reverse coding negatively worded items) yields a score range of 0 to 90, with lower scores implying poorer PCMC. To account for missing responses to questions which were not applicable to certain women (e.g. women who delivered via elective cesarean section did not have to answer questions on their experience during labor) the scores were calculated using a running mean across items, and then rescaled to reflect a standard range (0 to 90) to enable comparisons to previously published work on the scale [16,24]. All sub-scale scores were standardized to range from 0 to 100 to enable comparisons across sub-scales. Participant characteristics. This included sociodemographic factors that might affect the quality of PCMC that a woman receives—such as age, parity, marital status, religion, and tribe. We also assessed socioeconomic factors such as education, literacy, woman and partner’s occupation status, wealth quintile, and empowerment. Education was categorized as no school/primary, post primary/vocational/secondary, and college. Literacy was assessed through a survey question asking if the woman reads with difficulty or is illiterate, versus if the woman reads very well. The woman and her spouse’s employment status were assessed by a survey question asking, “Do you do any work for which you are paid?” and “Does your spouse/partner do any work for which he is paid?” Household wealth was measured in quintiles and calculated from an urban wealth index based on 13 questions on household assets [28]. Empowerment was assessed using questions from the Demographic Health Survey (DHS) module that measures sociocultural empowerment, including attitudes regarding gender norms and gender-based violence [29]. The scores are divided into low or high empowerment, using the median score. We also included a measure of experience of intimate partner violence which has been found to be associated with PCMC prior studies [16]. Responses indicating exposure to any of the items resulted in a code of “yes” for exposure to IPV. Facility and provider characteristics. The facility where the woman delivered was classified as a government hospital (higher level), health center (lower level), or private/faith-based health facility. Provider type indicates the highest skilled provider who attended at the delivery. Responses were categorized as low or no skill (auxiliary nurse or midwife, friend, relative or no one), skilled (clinical officer, nurse or midwife), or high skilled (doctor). Sex of provider indicates the reported sex of the highest skilled provider (male, female, or refused/delivered alone). Other covariates. To assess potential impact of familiarity and prior contact with the health system, we included assessments of whether women had previously delivered at a health facility and the timing and frequency of antenatal care. We also included a variable on whether the respondent had experienced any complications during her pregnancy and delivery, and if she perceived the complication as severe. Finally, we controlled for the timing and location of the interview. We first conducted descriptive analysis of all study variables. We then examined bivariate differences in PCMC scores by the independent variables using cross-tabulations and simple Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) regression with robust standard errors, clustered at the level of the health facility. Finally, we conducted multivariate analysis using multilevel models (MLM), with participants nested within health care facilities. MLM improves the specification of between and within facility effects, through the inclusion of random intercepts accounting for between-facility effects and fixed effects for facility type. The model was fitted via restricted maximum likelihood (REML), due to the relatively small number of health facilities. Individual-level sociodemographic characteristics and individual experiences of labor and delivery (e.g., professional status of personnel delivering child) were entered as level-1 predictors, and facility type (private, public, faith-based) was entered as a level-2 predictor. Only variables that were significantly associated with PCMC scores in the bivariate models or in previous studies were included in the MLMs. With this shortened list of variables, we ran tests of collinearity using the variance inflation factor (VIF), and eliminated variables which were highly correlated with other variables in the model. Initial models produced VIFs ranging from 1.17 to 10.95. In the final model, the VIFs ranged from 1.17 to 3.85, indicating a reduction in potential collinearity. The intraclass correlation coefficient in the final MLM was 0.176, suggesting that the nested model is more appropriate for the data.
