The use of facilities for labor and delivery: the views of women in rural Uganda


Submitted: 16 August 2016
Accepted: 14 June 2017
Published: 4 September 2017
Abstract views:
1058


PDF:
485
HTML:
149
Publisher's note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Authors

The aim of the paper is to explore factors associated with home or hospital delivery in rural Uganda. Qualitative interviews with recently-delivered women in rural Uganda and statistical analysis of data from the 2011 Ugandan Demographic and Health Survey (DHS) to assess the association between socio-demographic and cultural factors and delivery location in multivariable regression models. In the DHS, 61.7% (of 4907) women had a facility-based delivery (FBD); in adjusted analyses, FBD was associated with an urban setting [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 3.38, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.66 to 4.28)], the upper wealth quintile (aOR: 3.69, 95%CI 2.79 to 3.87) and with secondary education (aOR: 3.07, 95%CI 2.37 to 3.96). In interviews women quoted costs and distance as barriers to FBD. Other factors reported in interviews to be associated with FBD included family influence, perceived necessity of care (weak women needed FBD), and the reputation of the facility (women bypassed local facilities to deliver at better hospitals). Choosing a FBD is a complex decision and education around the benefits of FBD should be combined with interventions designed to remove barriers to FBD.

Supporting Agencies

The Univeristy of Southampton, The Victoria foundation, Wellbeing for women trust

Newell, R., Spillman, I., & Newell, M.-L. (2017). The use of facilities for labor and delivery: the views of women in rural Uganda. Journal of Public Health in Africa, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.4081/jphia.2017.592

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Citations