Health systems' preparedness to provide post-abortion care: assessment of health facilities in Burkina Faso, Kenya and Nigeria.
Abortion
Capacity
Health systems
Post-abortion care
Quality of care
Journal
BMC health services research
ISSN: 1472-6963
Titre abrégé: BMC Health Serv Res
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101088677
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
22 Apr 2022
22 Apr 2022
Historique:
received:
10
08
2021
accepted:
30
03
2022
entrez:
23
4
2022
pubmed:
24
4
2022
medline:
27
4
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
In many parts of sub-Saharan Africa, access to abortion is legally restricted, which partly contributes to high incidence of unsafe abortion. This may result in unsafe abortion-related complications that demand long hospital stays, treatment and attendance by skilled health providers. There is however, limited knowledge on the capacity of public health facilities to deliver post-abortion care (PAC), and the spread of PAC services in these settings. We describe and discuss the preparedness and capacity of public health facilities to deliver complete and quality PAC services in Burkina Faso, Kenya and Nigeria. A cross-sectional survey of primary, secondary and tertiary-level public health facilities was conducted between November 2018 and February 2019 in the three countries. Data on signal functions (including information on essential equipment and supplies, staffing and training among others) for measuring the ability of health facilities to provide post-abortion services were collected and analyzed. Across the three countries, fewer primary health facilities (ranging from 6.3-12.1% in Kenya and Burkina Faso) had the capacity to deliver on all components of basic PAC services. Approximately one-third (26-43%) of referral facilities across Burkina Faso, Kenya and Nigeria could provide comprehensive PAC services. Lack of trained staff, absence of necessary equipment and lack of PAC commodities and supplies were a main reason for inability to deliver specific PAC services (such as surgical procedures for abortion complications, blood transfusion and post-PAC contraceptive counselling). Further, the lack of capacity to refer acute PAC cases to higher-level facilities was identified as a key weakness in provision of post-abortion care services. Our findings reveal considerable gaps and weaknesses in the delivery of basic and comprehensive PAC within the three countries, linked to both the legal and policy contexts for abortion as well as broad health system challenges in the countries. There is a need for increased investments by governments to strengthen the capacity of primary, secondary and tertiary public health facilities to deliver quality PAC services, in order to increase access to PAC and avert preventable maternal mortalities.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
In many parts of sub-Saharan Africa, access to abortion is legally restricted, which partly contributes to high incidence of unsafe abortion. This may result in unsafe abortion-related complications that demand long hospital stays, treatment and attendance by skilled health providers. There is however, limited knowledge on the capacity of public health facilities to deliver post-abortion care (PAC), and the spread of PAC services in these settings. We describe and discuss the preparedness and capacity of public health facilities to deliver complete and quality PAC services in Burkina Faso, Kenya and Nigeria.
METHODS
METHODS
A cross-sectional survey of primary, secondary and tertiary-level public health facilities was conducted between November 2018 and February 2019 in the three countries. Data on signal functions (including information on essential equipment and supplies, staffing and training among others) for measuring the ability of health facilities to provide post-abortion services were collected and analyzed.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Across the three countries, fewer primary health facilities (ranging from 6.3-12.1% in Kenya and Burkina Faso) had the capacity to deliver on all components of basic PAC services. Approximately one-third (26-43%) of referral facilities across Burkina Faso, Kenya and Nigeria could provide comprehensive PAC services. Lack of trained staff, absence of necessary equipment and lack of PAC commodities and supplies were a main reason for inability to deliver specific PAC services (such as surgical procedures for abortion complications, blood transfusion and post-PAC contraceptive counselling). Further, the lack of capacity to refer acute PAC cases to higher-level facilities was identified as a key weakness in provision of post-abortion care services.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Our findings reveal considerable gaps and weaknesses in the delivery of basic and comprehensive PAC within the three countries, linked to both the legal and policy contexts for abortion as well as broad health system challenges in the countries. There is a need for increased investments by governments to strengthen the capacity of primary, secondary and tertiary public health facilities to deliver quality PAC services, in order to increase access to PAC and avert preventable maternal mortalities.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35459161
doi: 10.1186/s12913-022-07873-y
pii: 10.1186/s12913-022-07873-y
pmc: PMC9027923
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
536Subventions
Organisme : william and flora hewlett foundation
ID : 2017-6344
Organisme : sida
ID : 12103
Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s).
Références
Trop Med Int Health. 2001 Oct;6(10):787-98
pubmed: 11679127
Lancet Glob Health. 2014 Jun;2(6):e323-33
pubmed: 25103301
Soc Sci Med. 2020 Sep;260:113154
pubmed: 32673793
Reprod Health Matters. 2004 Nov;12(24 Suppl):227-34
pubmed: 15938178
Obstet Gynecol Int. 2014;2014:402456
pubmed: 24790605
BMC Public Health. 2015 Oct 12;15:1048
pubmed: 26459344
BMC Health Serv Res. 2020 Mar 24;20(1):244
pubmed: 32209080
Health Care Women Int. 2020 Jul;41(7):732-760
pubmed: 31855511
BMJ Glob Health. 2020 Jan 7;5(1):e001814
pubmed: 32133166
PLoS One. 2018 Sep 21;13(9):e0204240
pubmed: 30240408
Lancet Glob Health. 2019 Jan;7(1):e110-e118
pubmed: 30503402
JAMA. 1988 Sep 23-30;260(12):1743-8
pubmed: 3045356
Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2017 Sep;138(3):276-282
pubmed: 28631406
Lancet. 2006 Nov 25;368(9550):1887-92
pubmed: 17126721
Stud Fam Plann. 1990 Jul-Aug;21(4):197-208
pubmed: 2219225
Int Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2015 Dec;41(4):170-81
pubmed: 26871725
J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care. 2017 Jan;43(1):7-15
pubmed: 27172880
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2016 May 14;16:105
pubmed: 27180000
PLoS Med. 2012;9(11):e1001340
pubmed: 23152724
PLoS One. 2017 Apr 3;12(4):e0173639
pubmed: 28369114
Glob Health Sci Pract. 2019 Aug 27;7(Suppl 2):S258-S270
pubmed: 31455623
Contraception. 2018 Dec;98(6):510-516
pubmed: 30217474
Health Policy Plan. 2021 Aug 12;36(7):1077-1089
pubmed: 34131700
Int J Qual Health Care. 2010 Aug;22(4):237-43
pubmed: 20543209
Soc Sci Med. 2000 Sep;51(6):941-53
pubmed: 10972437
BMC Health Serv Res. 2021 Oct 15;21(1):1104
pubmed: 34654428
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2015 Feb 15;15:34
pubmed: 25884662
Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2006 Nov;95(2):209-20
pubmed: 17027759