ff

COMMUNITY LEVEL DEMAND FOR RH-SERVICES 6
The objective of this chapter is to provide quantitative and qualitative information about the
perception of the served communities in the catchment areas of the five FHM facilities towards
RH-services provided in the FHM facilities. The presented in this chapter derived from
information Exit Interview, quantitative data collected during the community- based survey and
included 1500 households in the five communities, and finally FGDs and in-depth interviews
with women, men, girls and male youth in the FHM-facilities’ communities.
6.1 FINDINGS OF THE EXIT INTERVIEW
The total interviewed clients in the studied 25 FHM facilities, in the five HSRP pilot governorates,
were 515 clients (about 20 clients per facility). The clients were purposefully selected to be
females who attended the health units to seek different types of services. The objectives of the exit
interview was to identify the perspectives of the clients towards the received services. The analysis
and presentation of data were designed to measure the perceived impact of FHM on RH-services
in terms of equity, accessibility, acceptability, integration, comprehensive services, continuity of
care and technical quality.
Awareness about the health unit:
Owing to the HSRP strategy of “renovation/reforming of clinics’ operation” of the already present
PHC facilities, people affirmed that they know the facility and had used its services before it
became a FHM facility.
Table (6.1) shows that 91% of the
clients declared their previous
utilization of the health unit. The
physical existence of the renovated
health unit near home had raised
awareness that there is something new
as expressed by 50% of the
interviewed clients. Propagation of
information among people (relatives,
friends, husbands) ranked the second
source of information about the FHU
(42%). The FHU plays a very minor
role in marketing for its services
(7.7%) either through the home visits
(5.8%) or announcing about its
services (1.6%). The geographic
accessibility of the heath unit has
been asserted, where 81.4% of the
clients stated that they usually come
to the health facility on foot.
Table (6.1) Percent distribution of the interviewed clients
according to previous utilization of the health unit and
geographic accessibility
Accessibility Determinants No %
Previous utilization of the health unit
Yes
No
Total
470
45
515
Sources of knowledge about the FHU
Near house
Neighbors/Friends
Relatives
Personnel from the clinic during home visits
Husband
Announcement from the clinic
Others
Total
Geographic accessibility
Coming on foot
Transportation
91.30
8.70
100.0
Table (6.2) illustrates that the interviewed clients are acquainted with the package of health
services delivered by the FHM units. On the average, each client could mention at least 4 types of
services. The package of reproductive health services ranks the first type of service in the memory
of the clients (75%), with less tendency to mention other services as management of chronic
diseases (10%). Regarding the components of RH services (13 components), 75% of the clients
mentioned immunization, 68% mentioned FP, and 58% mentioned ANC and 45% mentioned sick
baby care. The rare mentioning of services as premarital care, management of RTIs (especially
among males), as well as health services directed to youth, could indicate lacking demand for such
services.
255
106
90
30
21
8
5
515
419
96
49.50
20.60
17.50
5.8
4.10
1.60
0.90
81.40
18.60
Community level demand for RH-services 89