Table 4 Multivariate regression analysis predicting the utilization of ANC among women in highly disadvantaged communities in northern
Variables | Individual determinants (Model 1) | Quality of service delivery (Model 2) | Both (Model 3) |
|---|---|---|---|
Adjusted OR (95% CI) | Adjusted OR (95% CI) | Adjusted OR (95% CI) | |
Predisposing factors | |||
Age in years | 0.98 (0.95-1.01) | Â | 0.98 (0.93-1.03) |
Years of education | 1.15 ** (1.09-1.23) | Â | 1.16 * (1.06-1.27) |
Parity | 0.94 (0.84-1.05) | Â | 0.92 (0.77-1.09) |
Desire for the pregnancy: (unwanted) | |||
 Wanted | 1.82 ** (1.31-2.52) |  | 1.70 * (1.06-2.72) |
Region: (Irbid) | |||
 Jerash | 0.92 (0.57-1.51) |  | 1.73 (0.86-3.51) |
 Mafraq | 0.48 * (0.29-0.77) |  | 0.61 (0.30-1.23) |
Employment status: (unemployed) | Â | Â | Â |
 Employed | 0.80 (0.51-1.26) |  | 1.45 (0.75-2.81) |
Enabling recourses | |||
Health insurance: (uninsured) | |||
 Insured | 0.81(0.50-1.32) |  | 0.72 (0.35-1.48) |
Time taken to get to the nearest MCH center in minutes: (< 15 min) | |||
 15-30 | 0.92 (0.66-1.29) |  | 0.97 (0.60-1.56) |
 ≥30 | 0.42 * (0.26-0.69) |  | 0.35 * (0.17-0.70) |
Availability of ANC services: (underserved) | |||
 Served | 2.73 ** (1.85-4.03) |  | 4.34 ** (2.34-8.07) |
Health needs | |||
Total number of pregnancy-related illnesses: (no health problems) | |||
 1-2 health problems | 1.01 (0.67-1.50) |  | 0.80 (0.45-1.44) |
 ≥ 3 health problems | 2.14 ** (1.47-3.13) |  | 1.66 (0.97-2.84) |
Self-perceived health status: (poor) | |||
 Average | 1.03(0.70-1.51) |  | 1.48 (0.85-2.59) |
 Excellent | 0.94(0.61-1.44) |  | 1.41 (0.76-2.60) |
Patient-provider relations | |||
Dignified and respectful care was offered by healthcare providers: (rarely) | |||
 Sometimes |  | 2.09 (0.61-7.08) | 1.80 (0.43-7.52) |
 Often |  | 5.54 ** (2.60-11.81) | 5.68 ** (2.45-13.13) |
Providers were ready to discuss health problems/concerns with women: (rarely) | |||
 Sometimes |  | 2.37 * (1.41-3.97) | 2.28 * (1.27-4.07) |
 Often |  | 5.38 ** (3.28-8.82) | 7.22 ** (4.06-12.82) |
Privacy was maintained during consultation: (rarely) | |||
 Sometimes |  | 0.56 (0.12-2.63) | 0.46 (0.09-2.52) |
 Often |  | 0.70 (0.21-2.25) | 0.38 (0.09-1.58) |
Technical management | |||
Comprehensive physical exams were performed: (rarely) | |||
 Sometimes |  | 1.08 (0.61-1.93) | 1.19 (0.61-2.33) |
 Often |  | 1.45 (0.82-2.54) | 1.58 (0.84-2.97) |
Vaccines/supplements were available at the facility: (rarely) | |||
 Sometimes |  | 1.86 (0.41-8.43) | 2.24 (0.43-11.82) |
 Often |  | 1.87 (0.58-5.99) | 3.63 (0.89-14.83) |
Clinical tests were regularly conducted: (no) | |||
 Yes |  | 1.29 (0.84-1.97) | 1.27 (0.77-2.08) |
Information exchange | |||
Information received on ANC was: (little) | |||
 Fair |  | 1.11 (0.56-2.22) | 1.16 (0.54-2.51) |
 Enough |  | 7.34 ** (4.26-12.66) | 9.12 ** (4.91-16.92) |
Consultation time was:(short) | |||
 Average |  | 1.04 (0.29-3.69) | 1.11 (0.26-4.81) |
 Enough |  | 0.65 (0.29-1.46) | 0.51 (0.21-1.27) |
Provider explanations were easily to understand: (rarely) | |||
 Sometimes |  | 1.02 (0.53-1.96) | 0.77 (0.37-1.62) |
 Often |  | 1.97 * (1.12-3.46) | 2.38 * (1.22-4.66) |
Continuity and follow-up | |||
Follow-up appointments were regularly scheduled by providers: (rarely) | |||
 Sometimes |  | 3.03 * (1.46-6.29) | 3.65 * (1.61-8.28) |
 Often |  | 6.05 ** (3.51-10.43) | 6.51 ** (3.52-12.01) |
A return visit was encouraged by healthcare providers: (rarely) | |||
 Sometimes |  | 1.90 (0.89-4.07) | 1.66 (0.72-3.83) |
 Often |  | 2.42 ** (1.53-3.83) | 1.82 * (1.08-3.06) |
Appropriate constellation of services | |||
Time had to wait was: (short) | |||
 Average |  | 0.86 (0.39-1.94) | 0.63 (0.25-1.57) |
 Long |  | 0.68 (0.31-1.50) | 0.65 (0.27-1.57) |
Hours of service were: (inconvenient) | |||
 Convenient |  | 0.94 (0.59-1.51) | 0.96 (0.56-1.63) |
Nagelkerke R2 | 0.205 | 0.574 | 0.660 |