2
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Structural Quality of Services and Use of Family Planning Services in Primary Health Care Facilities in Ethiopia. How Do Public and Private Facilities Compare?

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background: Family planning (FP) is among the important interventions that reduce maternal mortality. Poor quality FP service is associated with lower services utilisation, in turn undermining the efforts to address maternal mortality. There is currently little research on the quality of FP services in the private sector in Ethiopia, and how it compares to FP services in public facilities. Methods: A secondary data analysis of two national surveys, Ethiopia Services Provision Assessment Plus Survey 2014 and Ethiopian Demographic and Health Survey 2016, was conducted. Data from 1094 (139 private, 955 public) health facilities were analysed. In total, 3696 women were included in the comparison of users’ characteristics. Logistic regression was conducted. Facility type (public vs. private) was the key exposure of interest. Results: The private facilities were less likely to have implants (Adjusted Odds Ratio (AOR) = 0.06; 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 0.03, 0.12), trained FP providers (AOR = 0.23; 95% CI: 0.14, 0.41) and FP guidelines/protocols (AOR = 0.33; 95% CI: 0.19, 0.54) than public facilities but were more likely to have functional cell phones (AOR = 8.20; 95% CI: 4.95, 13.59) and water supply (AOR = 3.37; 95% CI: 1.72, 6.59). Conclusion: This study highlights the need for strengthening both private and public facilities for public–private partnerships to contribute to increased FP use and better health outcomes.

          Related collections

          Most cited references16

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The quality of family planning services and client satisfaction in the public and private sectors in Kenya.

          To compare the quality of family planning services delivered at public and private facilities in Kenya. Data from the 2004 Kenya Service Provision Assessment were analysed. The Kenya Service Provision Assessment is a representative sample of health facilities in the public and private sectors, and comprises data obtained from a facility inventory, service provider interviews, observations of client-provider interactions and exit interviews. Quality-of-care indicators are compared between the public and private sectors along three dimensions: structure, process and outcome. Private facilities were superior to public sector facilities in terms of physical infrastructure and the availability of services. Public sector facilities were more likely to have management systems in place. There was no difference between public and private providers in the technical quality of care provided. Private providers were better at managing interpersonal aspects of care. The higher level of client satisfaction at private facilities could not be explained by differences between public and private facilities in structural and process aspects of care. Formal private sector facilities providing family planning services exhibit greater readiness to provide services and greater attention to client needs than public sector facilities in Kenya. Consistent with this, client satisfaction is much higher at private facilities. Technical quality of care provided is similar in public and private facilities.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The quality of family planning programs: concepts, measurements, interventions, and effects.

            This study reviews the major research and interventions concerning readiness and quality of care in family planning programs. It has three aims: to identify and describe the principal methodological research including conceptual frameworks, perspectives, and tools for measuring and improving quality; to describe the results from various intervention studies; and to assess what is known about the effect of such interventions. The review suggests that interventions that improve client-provider interactions show the greatest promise. Good quality of care results in such positive outcomes as clients' satisfaction, increased knowledge, and more effective and longer use of contraceptives. Rigorously documented evidence of the effects of interventions is sorely needed. The review indicates areas requiring additional research.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Who, What, Where: an analysis of private sector family planning provision in 57 low- and middle-income countries.

              Family planning service delivery has been neglected; rigorous analyses of the patterns of contraceptive provision are needed to inform strategies to address this neglect.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Int J Environ Res Public Health
                Int J Environ Res Public Health
                ijerph
                International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
                MDPI
                1661-7827
                1660-4601
                12 June 2020
                June 2020
                : 17
                : 12
                : 4201
                Affiliations
                [1 ]School of Public Health, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA 5005, Australia; afzal.mahmood@ 123456adelaide.edu.au (M.A.M.); judith.gomersall@ 123456adelaide.edu.au (J.S.G.); caroline.laurence@ 123456adelaide.edu.au (C.O.L.)
                [2 ]Department of Reproductive Health, Institute of Public Health, University of Gondar, Gondar 196, Ethiopia
                [3 ]School of Public Health, Curtin University, Perth, WA 6201, Australia
                [4 ]South Australian Health and Medical Research Institute, Adelaide, SA 5000, Australia
                [5 ]School of Public Health, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD 4072, Australia; yibeltalassefa343@ 123456gmail.com
                [6 ]Health System and Reproductive Health Research Directorate, Ethiopian Public Health Institute, Addis Ababa 1242, Ethiopia; tedi.getachew@ 123456yahoo.com
                [7 ]Institute of Public Health, College of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Gondar, Gondar 196, Ethiopia
                [8 ]Federal Ministry of Health, Addis Ababa, 1234, Ethiopia; kiflemengistu@ 123456yahoo.com
                Author notes
                [* ]Correspondence: gizachew.tessema@ 123456adelaide.edu.au ; Tel.: +61-470-118399; Fax: +61-8-8313-3339
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4784-8151
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9395-8693
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6486-0531
                Article
                ijerph-17-04201
                10.3390/ijerph17124201
                7345433
                32545564
                764c9557-90de-4b35-9de3-22c302cc91e2
                © 2020 by the authors.

                Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

                History
                : 05 May 2020
                : 08 June 2020
                Categories
                Article

                Public health
                quality of services,family planning,public–private partnership,primary health care,ethiopia

                Comments

                Comment on this article