[Home ] [Archive]    
:: Main Archive Search Submit Manuscript Publication Ethics Contact ::
:: Volume 5, Issue 3 (9-2020) ::
CJHR 2020, 5(3): 50-55 Back to browse issues page
Home or Healthcare Facility: Influence of Antenatal Health Service on the Decision on the Place of Birth in Indonesia
Ari Rachmawati Ismaya
School of Economic and Business, University of Indonesia, Depok, Indonesia , rachmawati19ari@gmail.com
Abstract:   (90 Views)
Background: Health facility is an ideal place for child birth to obtain favorable outcomes for maternal and neonatal health. Most of mothers in Indonesia have access to healthcare but 20% of them do not give birth in a healthcare facility. This study aimed to assess the association of the maternal health services and choosing a healthcare facility for birth.
Methods: This research utilized Indonesia’s Survey of Health Indicators (SIRKESNAS) 2016 data and analyzed it using logistic regression model.
Results: Antenatal care (ANC) (OR = 3.696; P-value = 0.004), preparedness of birth budget (OR = 2.291; P-value =0.007) and having maternal and child health (MCH) handbook (OR = 1.492; P-value = 0.103) were independently associated with the decision of healthcare facility birth. The ANC service particularly the availability of health professional provider as the first birth attendance (OR = 7.563; P-value = .00) and maternal examination as in the form of blood pressure test (OR = 5.009; P-value =.013) and ultrasonography (OR = 2.341; P-value =.001) substantially associated with the decision of the place of birth.
Conclusion: In order to encourage mothers to deliver in a healthcare facility, improving the quality of ANC services including utilization of MCH handbook and expanding the coverage of delivery insurance are the prominent concerns for healthcare policy.
Keywords: Antenatal care, Indonesia, Maternal health, Place of birth.
Full-Text [PDF 532 kb]   (26 Downloads)    
Article Type: Original Contributions | Subject: Health Management
Received: 2020/06/18 | Accepted: 2020/07/30 | Published: 2020/09/20
1. Maternal mortality ratio (MMR). Maternal mortality ratio (MMR) - MEASURE Evaluation. Updated 2018. Accessed February 20, 2020. Available at: https://www.measureevaluation.org/prh/rh_indicators/womens-health/sm/maternal-mortality-ratio-mmr
2. Indicator Metadata Registry Details. World Health Organization. World Health Organization. Available at: https://www.who.int/data/gho/indicator-metadata-registry/imr-details/4622#:~:text=Definition%3A,and%20site%20of%20the%20pregnancy. Accessed January 18, 2019.
3. United Nation. Indicators and a monitoring framework for the sustainable development goals. Launching a data revolution. New York, USA: Leadership Council Sustainable Development Solutions Network; 2015.
4. Statistics Indonesia. Profile of the People of Indonesia, Intercensal Population Survey Result 2015. Jakarta, Indonesia: Statistics Indonesia; 2016.
5. ASEAN statistical report on millennium development goals 2017. Jakarta, Indonesia: The ASEAN Secretariat; 2017.
6. Alliance for Maternal and Newborn Health Improvement (AMANHI) mortality study group. Population-based rates, timing, and causes of maternal deaths, stillbirths, and neonatal deaths in south Asia and sub-Saharan Africa: a multi-country prospective cohort study. Lancet Glob Health. 2018; 6(12):e1297-e1308. doi: 10.1016/S2214-109X(18)30385-1. [DOI:10.1016/S2214-109X(18)30385-1]
7. Strategies toward ending preventable maternal mortality (EPMM). World Health Organization. World Health Organization. Available at: https://www.who.int/reproductivehealth/topics/maternal_perinatal/epmm/en/. Accessed January 12, 2019.
8. United States Agency for International Development (USAID). Ending preventable maternal mortality: USAID maternal health vision for action. Washington, DC; 2015.
9. Indonesian Academy of Sciences. Evidence Summit on Maternal and Neonatal Mortality reduction in Indonesia: Executive summary. Jakarta, Indonesia: The Indonesian Academy of Sciences (AIPI); 2018.
10. ACOG Committee Opinion No. 476: planned home birth. Obstet Gynecol. 2011; 117(2 Pt 1):425-428. [DOI:10.1097/AOG.0b013e31820eee20]
11. American Academy of Pediatrics. Policy statement: Planned home birth. Pediatrics. 2013; 131:1016-1020. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e31820eee20. [DOI:10.1097/AOG.0b013e31820eee20]
12. Indonesia Ministry of Health Act of 2014 P.L No 97. Available at: http://www.ilo.org/dyn/natlex/natlex4.detail?p_lang=en&p_isn=91185&p_country=IDN&p_count=610&p_classification=15.01&p_classcount=5. Updated October 13, 2009.
13. Indonesian Ministry of Health, Balitbangkes B. Main result of RISKESDAS 2018 Jakarta, Indonesia: Balitbangkes; 2018.
14. Ha YP, Hurt LS, Tawiah-Agyemang C, Kirkwood BR, Edmond KM. Effect of socioeconomic deprivation and health service utilisation on antepartum and intrapartum stillbirth: population cohort study from rural Ghana. PLoS One. 2012; 7(7):e39050. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0039050. [DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0039050]
15. Gabrysch S, Nesbitt RC, Schoeps A, Hurt L, Soremekun S, Edmond K, et al. Does facility birth reduce maternal and perinatal mortality in Brong Ahafo, Ghana? A secondary analysis using data on 119 244 pregnancies from two cluster-randomised controlled trials. Lancet Global Health. 2019; 7(8):e1074-87. doi: 10.1016/S2214-109X(19)30165-2. [DOI:10.1016/S2214-109X(19)30165-2]
16. Nyakang'o SB, Booth A. Women's perceived barriers to giving birth in health facilities in rural Kenya: A qualitative evidence synthesis. Midwifery. 2018; 67:1-11. doi: 10.1016/j.midw.2018.08.009. [DOI:10.1016/j.midw.2018.08.009]
17. Begashaw B, Tesfaye T. Healthcare utilization among urban and rural households in Esera District: Comparative cross-sectional study. Am J Public Health Res. 2016; 4(2):56-61. doi: 10.12691/ajphr/4/2/3.
18. Indonesian Ministry of Health, Balitbangkes B. Survei Indikator Kesehatan Nasional (Sirkesnas) 2016. Jakarta, Indonesia: Balitbangkes; 2016.
19. World Health Organization. Opportunities for Africa's newborns: Practical data, policy and programmatic support for newborn care in Africa. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 2006:55-62.
20. World Health Organization. What is the efficacy/effectiveness of antenatal care and the financial and organizational implications? Denmark: Health Evidence Network; 2003.
21. Rai RK, Singh PK, Singh L. Utilization of maternal health care services among married adolescent women: insights from the Nigeria Demographic and Health Survey, 2008. Womens Health Issues. 2012; 22(4):e407-14. doi: 10.1016/j.whi.2012.05.001. [DOI:10.1016/j.whi.2012.05.001]
22. Owili PO, Muga MA, Chou YJ, Hsu YH, Huang N, Chien LY. Relationship between women's characteristics and continuum of care for maternal health in Kenya: Complex survey analysis using structural equation modeling. Women Health. 2017; 57(8):942-61. doi: 10.1080/03630242.2016.1222327. [DOI:10.1080/03630242.2016.1222327]
23. Gage AD, Leslie HH, Bitton A, Jerome JG, Joseph JP, Thermidor R, et al. Does quality influence utilization of primary health care? Evidence from Haiti. Globalization Health. 2018; 14(1):1-9. doi:10.1186/s12992-018-0379-0. [DOI:10.1186/s12992-018-0379-0]
24. World Health Organization. Positive experiences, key to antenatal care uptake and quality. World Health Organization. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 2019.
Send email to the article author

Add your comments about this article
Your username or Email:


XML     Print

Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Ismaya A R. Home or Healthcare Facility: Influence of Antenatal Health Service on the Decision on the Place of Birth in Indonesia. CJHR. 2020; 5 (3) :50-55
URL: http://cjhr.gums.ac.ir/article-1-157-en.html

Volume 5, Issue 3 (9-2020) Back to browse issues page
Caspian Journal of Health Research
Creative Commons License
Persian site map - English site map - Created in 0.13 seconds with 30 queries by YEKTAWEB 4263