Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://cris.library.msu.ac.zw//handle/11408/4245
Title: Is the closest health facility the one used in pregnancy care-seeking? A cross-sectional comparative analysis of self-reported and modelled geographical access to maternal care in Mozambique, India and Pakistan
Authors: Makacha, Liberty
Makanga, Prestige Tatenda
Dube, Yolisa Prudence
Bone, Jefrey
Munguambe, Khátia
Katageri, Geetanjali
Sharma, Sumedha
Vidler, Marianne
Sevene, Esperança
Ramadurg, Umesh
Charantimath, Umesh
Revankar, Amit
von Dadelszen, Peter
Keywords: Potential access
Realised access
Bland–Altman Index
Fixed bias
Limits of agreement
Proportional bias
Issue Date: 2020
Publisher: BioMed Central Ltd.
Series/Report no.: International Journal of Health Geographics;Vol.19 ; No.1
Abstract: Background: Travel time to care is known to infuence uptake of health services. Generally, pregnant women who take longer to transit to health facilities are the least likely to deliver in facilities. It is not clear if modelled access predicts fairly the vulnerability in women seeking maternal care across diferent spatial settings. Objectives: This cross-sectional analysis aimed to (i) compare travel times to care as modelled in a GIS environment with self-reported travel times by women seeking maternal care in Community Level Interventions for Pre-eclampsia: Mozambique, India and Pakistan; and (ii) investigate the assumption that women would seek care at the closest health facility. Methods: Women were interviewed to obtain estimated travel times to health facilities (R). Travel time to the closest facility was also modelled (P) (closest facility tool (ArcGIS)) and time to facility where care was sought estimated (A) (route network layer fnder (ArcGIS)). Bland–Altman analysis compared spatial variation in diferences between modelled and self-reported travel times. Variations between travel times to the nearest facility (P) with modelled travel times to the actual facilities accessed (A) were analysed. Log-transformed data comparison graphs for medians, with box plots superimposed distributions were used. Results: Modelled geographical access (P) is generally lower than self-reported access (R), but there is a geography to this relationship. In India and Pakistan, potential access (P) compared fairly with self-reported travel times (R) [P (H0: Mean diference=0)]<.001, limits of agreement: [−273.81; 56.40] and [−264.10; 94.25] respectively. In Mozambique, mean diferences between the two measures of access were signifcantly diferent from 0 [P (H0: Mean diference=0)=0.31, limits of agreement: [−187.26; 199.96]]. Conclusion: Modelling access successfully predict potential vulnerability in populations. Diferences between modelled (P) and self-reported travel times (R) are partially a result of women not seeking care at their closest facilities.
URI: https://ij-healthgeographics.biomedcentral.com/track/pdf/10.1186/s12942-020-0197-5.pdf
http://hdl.handle.net/11408/4245
ISSN: 1476-072X
Appears in Collections:Research Papers

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
makacha.pdfArticle1.96 MBAdobe PDFView/Open
Show full item record

Page view(s)

70
checked on Dec 2, 2024

Download(s)

18
checked on Dec 2, 2024

Google ScholarTM

Check


Items in MSUIR are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.