15.05.2014 Views

Nepal Clean Home Delivery Kit: Evaluation of the Health Impact - Path

Nepal Clean Home Delivery Kit: Evaluation of the Health Impact - Path

Nepal Clean Home Delivery Kit: Evaluation of the Health Impact - Path

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Table 2. Type <strong>of</strong> birth attendants, by kit use and district<br />

KIT USER<br />

KIT NON-USER<br />

Siraha Morang Sunsari Total Siraha Morang Sunsari Total<br />

Trained TBA 132 121 141 394 168 113 97 378<br />

% 96.4 91.7 93.4 93.8 96.6 89.0 94.2 93.6<br />

<strong>Health</strong> worker 5.0 11 10 26 6 14 6 26<br />

% 3.6 8.3 6.6 6.2 3.4 11.0 5.8 6.4<br />

Total Trained 137 132 151 420 174 127 103 404<br />

Untrained TBA 46 64 65 175 47 78 60 185<br />

% 79.3 45.4 32.7 44.0 38.2 41.5 47.2 42.2<br />

Family/neighbor 12 77 134 223 76 110 67 253<br />

% 20.7 54.6 67.3 56.0 61.8 58.5 52.8 57.8<br />

Total Untrained 58 141 199 398 123 188 127 438<br />

From Tables 3 and 4 on characteristics <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> households and <strong>the</strong> mo<strong>the</strong>rs, it is apparent<br />

that kit users and non-users as a whole do not differ greatly. More users are literate and in<br />

<strong>the</strong> higher socioeconomic category, but generally <strong>the</strong> differences between those with<br />

trained and untrained attendants are greater than those between kit users and non-users. In<br />

particular, <strong>the</strong>re are some significant differences between kit users with trained and<br />

untrained attendants. <strong>Kit</strong> users with a trained birth attendant had:<br />

• Higher proportion <strong>of</strong> female head <strong>of</strong> household.<br />

• More heads <strong>of</strong> household who were 50 years or older.<br />

• Higher literacy rate for head <strong>of</strong> household and for mo<strong>the</strong>rs.<br />

• Higher land ownership rate.<br />

• Higher proportion in mid-level socioeconomic status.<br />

• Younger mo<strong>the</strong>rs.<br />

• More first pregnancies, fewer with five or more pregnancies.<br />

• More mo<strong>the</strong>rs with antenatal care and with tetanus immunization.<br />

Because <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se differences and <strong>the</strong> possibility that some <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>m may be related to<br />

infection outcome, it was apparent that it might not be possible to pool <strong>the</strong> two groups <strong>of</strong><br />

kit users during <strong>the</strong> analysis. Although <strong>the</strong>re were only minor differences between <strong>the</strong><br />

characteristics <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> two groups <strong>of</strong> kit non-users (more households headed by <strong>the</strong> fa<strong>the</strong>rin-law<br />

ra<strong>the</strong>r than <strong>the</strong> husband and consequently more household heads who were 50<br />

years or older), <strong>the</strong>y differed substantially in birth practices (see below). The differences<br />

in antenatal care and tetanus toxoid (TT) were clearly related, since those with no<br />

antenatal care were much more likely to have no TT (57.6% vs. 9.4%).<br />

Table 3. Household characteristics, by cohort<br />

9<br />

<strong>Nepal</strong> <strong>Delivery</strong> <strong>Kit</strong> <strong>Evaluation</strong> May 2000

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!