people living in finglas and their health - School of Medicine - Trinity ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

RESULTS - PART 1 RESULTS - PART 1 Figure 3.11 Practices of women before and during their most recent pregnancy (if it occurred between January 1997 and April 2002) as reported by primary carers (n=58) PERCENTAGE 10 80 60 40 20 0 51.7 Planned 63.3 Peri-conceptual folic acid PRACTICES BEFORE AND DURING LAST PREGNANCY Fifty-two percent of the women’s last pregnancies were planned (Figure 3.11). Of those who planned their last pregnancy, over three fifths (19/30, 63%) had taken folic acid prior to conception. Almost a quarter had smoked during their last pregnancy, 5% did not attend antenatal care and 7% did not have a postnatal examination six weeks after delivery (Table 3.21). According to the primary carers, almost three fifths of the expectant women had antenatal care in a maternity hospital and over one third had their care shared with their general practitioner (Table 3.18). Over four fifths of the women had their youngest child in the Rotunda Maternity Hospital (Table 3.21). Table 3.21 Primary carers’ reported number of pregnancies in their households between January 1997 and April 2002, as well as health practices and service uptake by pregnant women for the most recent pregnancy No. % Women in household who have given birth since January 1997 and number of births to each woman One child 52 89.7 Two children 4 06.9 Three children 2 03.4 n 58 Information on the most recent pregnancy Age when became pregnant 18 to 19 11 19.0 20 to 29 18 31.0 30 to 42 29 50.0 n 58 Place where antenatal care was received Maternity hospital 31 58.5 Combined or shared care 20 37.7 Consultant private clinic 2 03.8 n 53 Place of delivery Rotunda 49 84.5 National Maternity Hospital 5 08.6 Coombe Womens Hospital 4 06.9 n 58 Attended 6 week post natal check up Yes 53 91.4 No 4 06.9 Don’t know 1 01.7 n 57 24.1 Smoked during pregnancy 94.8 Antenatal care Satisfaction with maternity services As one of the last three health services used, 15 women were admitted to a maternity hospital in the twelve months preceding the survey. Eleven of them reported satisfaction levels, of whom seven were satisfied with the service (Table 3.22). The main reason for satisfaction was that they received good treatment or care (5/7, 71%). For three of the four individuals dissatisfied with the service the long waiting period encountered was the reason given. Table 3.22 Primary carers’ reported number (%) of the individuals admitted to maternity hospital in the year prior to the survey and level of satisfaction with services No. % Admitted to maternity hospital Yes 15 07.3 No 190 92.7 n (women aged 15 to 49 years) 205 Satisfied with care and treatment (1 very satisfied to 6 very dissatisfied) Yes (1 to 3) 7 63.6 No (4 to 6) 4 36.4 n 11 3.9 COMMUNITY HEALTH SERVICES General practice The primary carers reported that 559 (58%) of the 963 individuals residing in the survey households attended their general practitioner in the year prior to the survey. This figure was adjusted to take account of the over representation of the population in the sample who lived in low deprivation district electoral divisions compared to the proportion living in high deprivation district electoral divisions, and following adjustment, 57.7% of household members had attended their general practitioner in the year prior to the survey. The respondents were also asked to recall the purpose of their most recent visit. Acute onset of illness, medical check up and repeat prescriptions were the most common purposes cited (Table 3.23). Of those who attended their general practitioner in the last year, just over 57% attended a general practitioner in Finglas while a further 20% attended in Glasnevin (Table 3.23). Four out of every ten individuals who attended their general practitioner in the last year walked to the surgery while a further one in every ten travelled by public transport. 44 45
RESULTS - PART 1 RESULTS - PART 1 Table 3.23 Primary carers reported purpose for most recent use of the general practitioner by individuals in their household in the 12 months prior to the survey No. % Purpose for visit Sudden illness 235 42.2 Medical check up 144 25.9 Repeat prescription 132 23.7 Vaccinations 29 5.2 Advise 17 3.0 n 557 Location of the surgery Finglas 315 57.1 Glasnevin 110 19.9 Ballymun 32 05.8 Doctor in the work place 8 01.4 Other 87 15.8 n 552 Transport used to travel to hospital Private car 256 46.0 Walked 228 40.9 Bus 46 08.3 Taxi 16 02.9 Home visit 8 01.4 Cycled 3 00.5 n 557 Of the 599 individuals who attended their general practitioner in the last year, the primary carer reported a level of satisfaction with the service provided for 487 individuals (Table 3.24). Eighty three percent were satisfied with the service provided while 17% were dissatisfied with the service. Among those who were satisfied, the main reasons were, the doctor provided good treatment or care (65%), the doctor listened to the problem (46%), and the staff were friendly (38%). Among those who were dissatisfied, the main cause was the doctor did not listen to the problem (46%). Table 3.24 Primary carers’ reported number (%) of the individuals visited their GP in the year prior to the survey, the level of satisfaction with services and their reasons for satisfaction/dissatisfaction No. % Visited GP Yes 559 58.0 No 404 42.0 n 963 Satisfaction with care and treatment from GP (1 very satisfied to 6 very dissatisfied) 1 261 53.6 2 100 20.5 3 43 08.9 4 39 08.0 5 26 05.3 6 18 03.7 n 487 Satisfied with care and treatment from GP Yes (1 to 3) 404 83.0 No (4 to 6) 83 17.0 n 487 Reason satisfied with care and treatment from GP (n = 404) Nearby 67 16.6 Staff courteous and friendly 153 37.9 Short waiting period 46 11.4 Doctor listened to the problem 184 45.5 Doctor explained the condition 145 35.9 Doctor explained the treatment possibilities 131 32.4 Doctor provided good treatment or care 263 65.0 Service easily available on a 24 – hour basis 31 06.7 Pleasant environment 29 07.2 Affordable 9 01.7 Organised appointments 27 06.7 Longterm relationship with GP 3 00.7 Reason dissatisfied with care and treatment from GP (n = 83) Too far 0 00.0 Staff unfriendly 17 20.5 Long waiting periods 15 18.0 Doctor did not listen to the problem 38 45.8 Doctor did not explain the condition 17 20.5 Doctor did not explain the treatment possibilities 19 22.9 Doctor provided inadequate or incorrect treatment 19 22.9 Service difficult to access outside normal working hours 4 04.8 Unpleasant environment 0 00.0 Expensive 9 10.8 No aftercare 8 09.6 Other 10 12.0 Similar proportions of household members who visited the general practitioner in the twelve months prior to the survey were living in the less deprived areas and the more deprived areas (261/444, 59% versus 298/ 519, 57%, p=0.7). 46 47
Page 1 and 2: PEOPLE LIVING IN FINGLAS AND THEIR
Page 3 and 4: TABLE OF CONTENTS Page TABLE OF CON
Page 5 and 6: LIST OF TABLES Page LIST OF TABLES
Page 7 and 8: SUMMARY - PART 1 SUMMARY - PART 1 S
Page 9 and 10: INTRODUCTION - PART 1 METHODS - PAR
Page 11 and 12: METHODS - PART 1 The needs for adul
Page 13 and 14: RESULTS - PART 1 RESULTS - PART 1 T
Page 15 and 16: RESULTS - PART 1 RESULTS - PART 1 3
Page 19 and 20: RESULTS - PART 1 RESULTS - PART 1 C
Page 21 and 22: RESULTS - PART 1 RESULTS - PART 1 3
Page 23: RESULTS - PART 1 RESULTS - PART 1 F
Page 31 and 32: DISCUSSION - PART 1 The high respon
Page 33 and 34: SUMMARY - PART 2 PEOPLE LIVING IN F
Page 35 and 36: METHODS - PART 2 METHODS - PART 2 M
Page 37 and 38: RESULTS - PART 2 RESULTS - PART 2 H
Page 39 and 40: RESULTS - PART 2 RESULTS - PART 2 S
Page 41 and 42: RESULTS - PART 2 RESULTS - PART 2
Page 43 and 44: DISCUSSION - PART 2 DISCUSSION PART
Page 45 and 46: APPENDIX 1 APPENDIX 2 INFORMATION L
Page 47 and 48: APPENDIX 3 + 4 APPENDIX 5 APPENDIX
Page 49 and 50: APPENDIX 5 APPENDIX 6 & 7 Appendix

people living in finglas and their health - School of Medicine - Trinity ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?