Mothers' satisfaction with care during facility-based childbirth: a cross-sectional survey in southern Mozambique.


Journal

BMC pregnancy and childbirth
ISSN: 1471-2393
Titre abrégé: BMC Pregnancy Childbirth
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100967799

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
19 Aug 2019
Historique:
received: 17 01 2019
accepted: 06 08 2019
entrez: 21 8 2019
pubmed: 21 8 2019
medline: 7 2 2020
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Client satisfaction is an essential component of quality of care. Health system factors, processes of care as well as mothers' characteristics influence the extent to which care meets the expectations of mothers and families. In our study, we specifically aimed to address the mothers' experiences of, and satisfaction with, care during childbirth. A population-based cross-sectional study, using structured interviews with published sequences of questions assessing satisfaction, including 4358 mothers who gave birth during the 12 months before June 2016 to estimate satisfaction with childbirth care. Regression analysis was used to determine the predictors of client satisfaction. Most mothers (92.5%) reported being satisfied with care during childbirth and would recommend that a family member to deliver at the same facility. Specifically, 94.7% were satisfied with the cleanliness of the facility, 92.0% reported being satisfied with the interaction with the healthcare providers, but only 49.8% felt satisfied with the assistance to feed their baby. Mothers who had negative experiences during the process of care, such as being abandoned when needing help, disrespect, humiliation, or physical abuse, reported low levels of satisfaction when compared to those who had not had such experiences (68.5% vs 93.5%). Additionally, they reported higher levels of dissatisfaction (20.1% vs 2.1%). Regression analysis revealed that mothers who gave birth in primary level facilities tended to be more satisfied than those who gave birth in hospitals, and having a companion increased, on average, the overall satisfaction score, with 0.06 in type II health centres (CI 0.03-0.10) and with 0.05 in type I health centres (CI - 0.02 - 0.13), compared to - 0.01(CI -0.08 - 0.07) in the hospitals, irrespective of age, education and socio-economic background. Childbirth at the primary level facilities contributes to the level of satisfaction. The provision of childbirth care should consider women's preferences and needs, including having a companion of choice. We highlight the challenge in balancing safety of care versus satisfaction with care and in developing policies on the optimum configuration of childbirth care. Interventions to improve the interaction with providers and the provision of respectful care are recommended.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Client satisfaction is an essential component of quality of care. Health system factors, processes of care as well as mothers' characteristics influence the extent to which care meets the expectations of mothers and families. In our study, we specifically aimed to address the mothers' experiences of, and satisfaction with, care during childbirth.
METHODS METHODS
A population-based cross-sectional study, using structured interviews with published sequences of questions assessing satisfaction, including 4358 mothers who gave birth during the 12 months before June 2016 to estimate satisfaction with childbirth care. Regression analysis was used to determine the predictors of client satisfaction.
RESULTS RESULTS
Most mothers (92.5%) reported being satisfied with care during childbirth and would recommend that a family member to deliver at the same facility. Specifically, 94.7% were satisfied with the cleanliness of the facility, 92.0% reported being satisfied with the interaction with the healthcare providers, but only 49.8% felt satisfied with the assistance to feed their baby. Mothers who had negative experiences during the process of care, such as being abandoned when needing help, disrespect, humiliation, or physical abuse, reported low levels of satisfaction when compared to those who had not had such experiences (68.5% vs 93.5%). Additionally, they reported higher levels of dissatisfaction (20.1% vs 2.1%). Regression analysis revealed that mothers who gave birth in primary level facilities tended to be more satisfied than those who gave birth in hospitals, and having a companion increased, on average, the overall satisfaction score, with 0.06 in type II health centres (CI 0.03-0.10) and with 0.05 in type I health centres (CI - 0.02 - 0.13), compared to - 0.01(CI -0.08 - 0.07) in the hospitals, irrespective of age, education and socio-economic background.
CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS
Childbirth at the primary level facilities contributes to the level of satisfaction. The provision of childbirth care should consider women's preferences and needs, including having a companion of choice. We highlight the challenge in balancing safety of care versus satisfaction with care and in developing policies on the optimum configuration of childbirth care. Interventions to improve the interaction with providers and the provision of respectful care are recommended.

Identifiants

pubmed: 31426758
doi: 10.1186/s12884-019-2449-6
pii: 10.1186/s12884-019-2449-6
pmc: PMC6701029
doi:

Types de publication

Evaluation Study Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

303

Subventions

Organisme : Sida
ID : No 51140011
Organisme : Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
ID : OPP1017337 to PvD

Investigateurs

Sibone Mocumbi (S)
Ulf Högberg (U)
Erik Lampa (E)
Charfudin Sacoor (C)
Anifa Valá (A)
Anna Bergström (A)
Peter von Dadelszen (P)
Khátia Munguambe (K)
Claudia Hansonm (C)
Esperança Sevene (E)

Références

J Adv Nurs. 1999 Sep;30(3):723-31
pubmed: 10499230
Birth. 2003 Jun;30(2):75-82
pubmed: 12752163
J Adv Nurs. 2004 Apr;46(2):212-9
pubmed: 15056335
Milbank Q. 2005;83(4):691-729
pubmed: 16279964
BMC Public Health. 2005 Dec 22;5:140
pubmed: 16372911
Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2006;85(5):551-60
pubmed: 16752233
Trop Med Int Health. 2006 Sep;11(9):1442-51
pubmed: 16930267
Trop Med Int Health. 2006 Nov;11(11):1670-8
pubmed: 17054746
Reprod Health. 2007 Jul 06;4:5
pubmed: 17612408
J Biomed Inform. 2009 Apr;42(2):377-81
pubmed: 18929686
Womens Health (Lond). 2008 May;4(3):211-4
pubmed: 19072468
Int J Qual Health Care. 2009 Apr;21(2):79-86
pubmed: 19208648
Soc Sci Med. 2009 Jul;69(1):68-75
pubmed: 19446942
Am J Public Health. 2009 Sep;99(9):1666-72
pubmed: 19608959
Matern Child Health J. 2012 Feb;16(2):288-96
pubmed: 21301945
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011 Feb 16;(2):CD003766
pubmed: 21328263
Malawi Med J. 2010 Mar;22(1):5-9
pubmed: 21618840
PLoS One. 2012;7(9):e44484
pubmed: 22962616
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2013 Dec 17;13:235
pubmed: 24341288
Online J Public Health Inform. 2014 Feb 05;5(3):228
pubmed: 24678381
Bull World Health Organ. 2014 Apr 1;92(4):246-53
pubmed: 24700992
Lancet. 2014 Sep 20;384(9948):e42-4
pubmed: 24965825
Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2015 Feb;128(2):95-9
pubmed: 25467915
Bull World Health Organ. 2014 Dec 1;92(12):915-7
pubmed: 25552776
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2015 Apr 18;15:97
pubmed: 25928085
BJOG. 2015 Jul;122(8):1045-9
pubmed: 25929823
PLoS Med. 2015 Jun 30;12(6):e1001847; discussion e1001847
pubmed: 26126110
J Egypt Public Health Assoc. 2015 Jun;90(2):64-71
pubmed: 26154833
Perspect Public Health. 2015 Sep;135(5):243-50
pubmed: 26187638
BMC Res Notes. 2015 Oct 01;8:528
pubmed: 26427532
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2015 Oct 12;15:253
pubmed: 26459290
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2015 Nov 23;15:306
pubmed: 26596353
Lancet. 2016 Feb 6;387(10018):587-603
pubmed: 26794078
Reprod Health. 2016 Feb 11;13:11
pubmed: 26867797
Int J Psychol. 2016 Dec;51(6):474-480
pubmed: 26914819
Reprod Health. 2016 Jun 08;13 Suppl 1:56
pubmed: 27357579
Obstet Gynecol Int. 2016;2016:5798068
pubmed: 27413377
Midwifery. 2016 Sep;40:95-101
pubmed: 27428104
Lancet. 2016 Oct 29;388(10056):2193-2208
pubmed: 27642023
Midwifery. 2017 Jan;44:35-40
pubmed: 27889681
BJOG. 2017 Aug;124(9):1335-1344
pubmed: 28139878
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2017 Jun 29;17(1):203
pubmed: 28662645
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Jul 06;7:CD003766
pubmed: 28681500
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2017 Sep 25;17(1):319
pubmed: 28946851
Reprod Health. 2017 Oct 11;14(1):127
pubmed: 29020966
Reprod Health. 2017 Nov 10;14(1):147
pubmed: 29126412
PLoS One. 2018 Feb 2;13(2):e0184249
pubmed: 29394247
Obstet Gynecol Int. 2017;2017:3717408
pubmed: 29445401
Int J Qual Health Care. 2018 Oct 1;30(8):594-601
pubmed: 29672762
Int J Qual Health Care. 2018 Dec 1;30(10):793-801
pubmed: 29767725
Lancet Glob Health. 2018 Nov;6(11):e1196-e1252
pubmed: 30196093
JAMA. 1988 Sep 23-30;260(12):1743-8
pubmed: 3045356
Birth. 1985 Fall;12(3):141-5
pubmed: 3850745

Auteurs

Sibone Mocumbi (S)

Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Faculty of Medicine, Universidade Eduardo Mondlane (UEM), Av. Salvador Allende 702, 1100, Maputo, Mozambique. sibone.mocumbi@gmail.com.
Department of Women's and Children's Health, Uppsala University, Akademiska sjukhuset, SE-75185, Uppsala, Sweden. sibone.mocumbi@gmail.com.

Ulf Högberg (U)

Department of Women's and Children's Health, Uppsala University, Akademiska sjukhuset, SE-75185, Uppsala, Sweden.

Erik Lampa (E)

Uppsala Clinical Research Centre, Uppsala University, Dag Hammarskjölds väg 38, 751 85, Uppsala, Sweden.

Charfudin Sacoor (C)

Centro de Investigação em Saúde de Manhiça (CISM), Rua 12, Manhiça, Mozambique.

Anifa Valá (A)

Centro de Investigação em Saúde de Manhiça (CISM), Rua 12, Manhiça, Mozambique.

Anna Bergström (A)

Department of Women's and Children's Health, Uppsala University, Akademiska sjukhuset, SE-75185, Uppsala, Sweden.
University College London, Institute for Global Health, Gower St, London, WC1E 6BT, UK.

Peter von Dadelszen (P)

Department of Women and Children's Health, School of Life Course Sciences, Faculty of Life Sciences and Medicine, King's College London, 1 Lambeth Palace Road, London, SE1 7EU, UK.

Khátia Munguambe (K)

Centro de Investigação em Saúde de Manhiça (CISM), Rua 12, Manhiça, Mozambique.
Department of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, Universidade Eduardo Mondlane, Av. Salvador Allende 702 R/C, Maputo, Mozambique.

Claudia Hanson (C)

Department of Public Health Sciences, Karolinska Institutet, Tomtebodavagen 18A, Plan 4, Stockholm, Sweden.
Department of Disease Control, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel St, London, WC1E 7HT, UK.

Esperança Sevene (E)

Centro de Investigação em Saúde de Manhiça (CISM), Rua 12, Manhiça, Mozambique.
Department of Physiological Science, Clinical Pharmacology, Faculty of Medicine, Universidade Eduardo Mondlane, Av. Salvador Allende 702 R/C, Maputo, Mozambique.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH