Skip to main content

Table 6 Predictors of women’s satisfaction with maternal and neonatal health services when last received: Malawi, 2012

From: Is quality of care a key predictor of perinatal health care utilization and patient satisfaction in Malawi?

Characteristics Complete satisfaction with services when last received (< complete satisfaction = ref) -- OR (95% CI)
Family planning Antenatal care Delivery care Postnatal care
Socio-demographic
Parity (3–4 = ref)
 1 0.75 (0.41, 1.39) 0.84 (0.51, 1.39) 0.82 (0.52, 1.29) 1.05 (0.62, 1.78)
 2 0.67 (0.39, 1.15) 0.87 (0.51, 1.49) 0.69 (0.43, 1.12) 0.96 (0.55, 1.66)
 ≥5 0.72 (0.41, 1.27) 0.64 (0.39, 1.06) 0.95 (0.57, 1.58) 0.98 (0.56, 1.74)
Religion (Other Christian = ref)
 Catholic 1.24 (0.70, 2.21) 0.95 (0.59, 1.52) 1.26 (0.82, 1.95) 1.08 (0.66, 1.77)
 Presbyterian 0.52 (0.31, 0.89) 0.55 (0.34, 0.91) 0.70 (0.43, 1.14) 0.85 (0.47, 1.51)
 Other 0.43 (0.18, 1.01) 1.06 (0.42, 2.68) 1.64 (0.69, 3.91) 1.84 (0.61, 5.62)
Ngoni ethnicity (no = ref) 1.68 (0.94, 3.00) 1.78 (1.04, 3.05) 1.63 (1.00, 2.68) 1.80 (1.02, 3.16)
Married/living together (unmarried/divorced/widowed = ref) 1.84 (0.96, 3.51) 1.50 (0.91, 2.48) 0.60 (0.34, 1.08) 1.58 (0.91, 2.74)
Reading level (reads the entire sentence = ref)
 Cannot read simple sentence 0.73 (0.45, 1.18) 0.80 (0.52, 1.24) 0.81 (0.54, 1.22) 0.91 (0.58, 1.43)
 Reads part of sentence 0.85 (0.45, 1.59) 0.59 (0.35, 0.99) 0.66 (0.39, 1.10) 1.05 (0.56, 2.00)
Household wealth (5th/richest = ref)
 1st (poorest) 0.73 (0.39, 1.38) 0.76 (0.40, 1.44) 0.73 (0.42, 1.26) 0.53 (0.28, 1.02)
 2nd 0.97 (0.54, 1.76) 0.66 (0.38, 1.12) 0.79 (0.47, 1.32) 0.58 (0.32, 1.06)
 3rd 1.15 (0.60, 2.17) 0.83 (0.47, 1.47) 0.66 (0.38, 1.14) 0.82 (0.42, 1.57)
 4th 1.22 (0.62, 2.38) 1.21 (0.65, 2.25) 0.73 (0.43, 1.24) 0.89 (0.46, 1.74)
Closest facility to the woman’s residence
Perception that staff provides high quality services (no = ref) 1.06 (0.52, 2.15) 1.77 (1.00, 3.12) 1.97 (1.20, 3.26) 1.54 (0.75, 3.14)
Perception that staff ensures patients’ privacy (no = ref) 0.94 (0.39, 2.24) 0.56 (0.25, 1.30) 0.78 (0.42, 1.46) 0.24 (0.07, 0.78)
Perception that provider(s) is always available (no = ref) 1.33 (0.67, 2.68) 1.65 (0.95, 2.87) 1.31 (0.79, 2.16) 0.99 (0.51, 1.92)
Perception that facility is clean (no = ref) 2.21 (0.91, 5.35) 1.91 (0.80, 4.57) 2.85 (1.38, 5.89) 3.53 (1.50, 8.30)
Perception that unmarried women can access FP services 0.65 (0.41, 1.05)    
Time to reach closest facility (1–2 h = ref)     
 <30 min 0.53 (0.31, 0.93) 0.46 (0.27, 0.80) 0.54 (0.32, 0.89) 0.53 (0.31, 0.91)
 30–59 min 0.83 (0.51, 1.36) 0.65 (0.41, 1.04) 1.02 (0.66, 1.58) 1.10 (0.65, 1.87)
 >2 h 2.71 (1.18, 6.21) 0.66 (0.38, 1.13) 1.13 (0.69, 1.84) 0.90 (0.49, 1.66)
Maternal health service utilization indicators
Place where FP services last obtained (Government facility = ref)a
 Private/mission-based facility
1.57 (0.77, 3.23)    
Trimester when ANC initiated last pregnancy (2nd = ref)
 1st   1.05 (0.64, 1.73)   
 3rd   0.63 (0.30, 1.12)   
Number of ANC visits last pregnancy   0.94 (0.78, 1.12)   
Facility ownership last delivery (Government facility = ref)
 Private/mission-based facility
   1.36 (.086, 2.15)  
Timing of 1st postnatal checkb (weeks)     1.01 (0.89, 1.15)
Number of checks within 2 months postpartumb     1.04 (0.77, 1.42)
Quality of services when last received
Respondent got the FP method she wanted (no = ref) 0.80 (0.63, 1.03)    
Indexc of FP quality provision 1.49 (1.21, 1.84)    
ANC from skilled provider (no = ref)   0.44 (0.14, 1.38)   
Pregnancy danger signs were discussed (no = ref)   1.29 (0.70, 2.36)   
Skilled birth attendant (no = ref)    0.51 (0.20, 1.33)  
Time to first consult before delivery (hours)    1.03 (0.95, 1.12)  
Indexd of delivery service quality provision    1.96 (1.70, 2.27)  
Skilled provider at 1st postnatal checkb (no = ref)     0.40 (0.14, 1.17)
Postpartumb danger signs were discussed (no = ref)     2.65 (1.46, 4.80)
  1. FP family planning, ANC antenatal care
  2. Notes: Results from multivariate logistic regression models adjusted for all factors shown and for the complex survey design; figures in bold are statistically significant at p < 0.05; figures shown in italics are statistically significant at p < 0.10; aAlso controlled for other place where family planning services were obtained; bMaternal and/or neonatal care given interest in contact with health care system following delivery; cIndex constructed using 4 items: provider explained how to use chosen FP method, explained possible side effects, mentioned if method protects against HIV, and scheduled follow-up (range 0–4); dIndex constructed using 5 items: able to move around and choose the position that made her most comfortable, got the pain relief she wanted, not left alone by providers at a time when it worried her, provider(s) did not yell or humiliate the respondent in any way, and respondent felt involved in decision about her care (range 0–5)