Show simple item record

Files in this item

Thumbnail

Item metadata

dc.contributor.authorJayachandran, Vinitha
dc.contributor.authorChapotera, Gertrude
dc.contributor.authorStones, William
dc.date.accessioned2016-06-22T14:30:23Z
dc.date.available2016-06-22T14:30:23Z
dc.date.issued2016
dc.identifier.citationJayachandran , V , Chapotera , G & Stones , W 2016 , ' Quality of facility-based family planning services for adolescents in Malawi : findings from a national census of health facilities ' , Malawi Medical Journal , vol. 28 , no. 2 , pp. 48-52 . https://doi.org/10.4314/mmj.v28i2.4en
dc.identifier.issn1995-7262
dc.identifier.otherPURE: 243427784
dc.identifier.otherPURE UUID: 9ba1f2ee-c15c-45bd-942d-599a06864072
dc.identifier.otherScopus: 84980344047
dc.identifier.otherWOS: 000380874600004
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10023/9035
dc.descriptionThis research was developed at a DHS Program workshop funded by USAID Malawi.en
dc.description.abstractAim – To describe the quality, in terms of provision and experience of care, of facility based family planning services for adolescents compared to older clients in Malawi. Methods- Secondary data analysis of 1388 observations of consultations, reflecting provision of care, and client exit interviews, reflecting experience of care, undertaken in the Service Provision Assessment survey 2013-14, a census of all formal health facilities in the country. Results- The youngest clients (age group 13-19) had twice the odds of reporting a better experience of care compared to clients aged 26 and older (OR 2.03, 95% CI 1.15 to 3.54, P=0.013). The standard of observed provision was low, typically with half or more of the mandated elements of care omitted. Compared with clients aged over 25, provision of care was slightly better for adolescents with a coefficient of 4.56 on a percentage scale (95% CI 0.90 to 8.23, P=0.015) and a coefficient of 2.33 for those aged 20-25 (95% CI 0.21 to 4.44, P=0.032). Clients seen in facilities under non-government organisation management had better provision of care compared to government facilities with a coefficient of 12.35 (95% CI 6.70 to 18.01, P<0.001); care was worse for clients seen in clinics compared to hospitals (coefficient -6.88, 95% CI -11.41 to -2.35, P=0.003) and also for clients seen by Health Surveillance Assistants compared to those seen by a clinician (coefficient -9.41, 95% CI -15.53 to -3.29, P=0.003). Conclusion- Quality of care for adolescents attending facility based family planning services was slightly better than for older clients but this is overshadowed by the finding of a low standard of care overall. We conclude that health system strengthening especially at clinic level is a policy and programming priority that will contribute to adolescent reproductive health in Malawi, building on successful existing models.
dc.language.isoeng
dc.relation.ispartofMalawi Medical Journalen
dc.rights© 2016, Malawi Medical Journal. This work is made available online in accordance with the publisher’s policies. This is the author created, accepted version manuscript following peer review and may differ slightly from the final published version. The final published version of this work is available at http://www.medcol.mw/mmj/ http://dx.doi.org/10.4314/mmj.v28i2.4en
dc.subjectAdolescent healthen
dc.subjectContraceptionen
dc.subjectContraception behaviouren
dc.subjectFamily planning servicesen
dc.subjectQuality of health careen
dc.subjectService provision assessmenten
dc.subjectRA0421 Public health. Hygiene. Preventive Medicineen
dc.subjectRJ Pediatricsen
dc.subjectNDASen
dc.subjectSDG 3 - Good Health and Well-beingen
dc.subject.lccRA0421en
dc.subject.lccRJen
dc.titleQuality of facility-based family planning services for adolescents in Malawi : findings from a national census of health facilitiesen
dc.typeJournal articleen
dc.description.versionPostprinten
dc.contributor.institutionUniversity of St Andrews. School of Medicineen
dc.contributor.institutionUniversity of St Andrews. Global Health Implementation Groupen
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.4314/mmj.v28i2.4
dc.description.statusPeer revieweden
dc.identifier.urlhttp://www.mmj.mw/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/48_MMJ-2016-03-0045.R2_Stones-OR.pdfen


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record