Effectiveness of checklist-based box system intervention (CBBSI) versus routine care on improving utilization of antenatal care visits in Northwest Ethiopia: a cluster randomized controlled trial

Netsanet Belete Andargie, Gurmesa Tura Debelew, Netsanet Belete Andargie, Gurmesa Tura Debelew

Abstract

Background: In Ethiopia, the proportion of mothers who attend the fourth antenatal care visit is lower than the proportion who attend the first visit. Although the reasons for these dropouts were investigated, few studies introduced interventions to promote the fourth antenatal care visit. Hence, the aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of checklist-based box system intervention on improving fourth antenatal care visit.

Method: This study employed a double-blind, parallel-group, two-arm cluster randomized controlled trial to compare the effectiveness of checklist-based box system intervention with the usual standard of care as a control arm. Study clusters are assigned to intervention and control arm in 1:1 allocation ratio using simple randomization technique. Pregnant mothers below 16 weeks of gestation were enrolled. Open data kit was used to collect data from the baseline and end-line surveys, and STATA version 15.0 was used to analyse the data. A difference-in-difference estimator was used to compare fourth antenatal care visit between the intervention and control groups across time. Mixed effect multi-level logistic regression was used to examine the relationship between the dependent and independent variables.

Result: Data were collected from 2224 mothers who belong to 15 intervention and 15 control clusters. The difference in difference estimation resulted in a significant difference (26.1, 95%CI: 18-34%, p < 0.0001) between the intervention and control groups. Similarly, as compared to controls, the fourth antenatal care visit was found significantly higher in the intervention clusters (432 (85.2%) Vs. 297 (53.7%), p < 0.0001)/(AOR:5.69, 95% CI:4.14-7.82). Mothers who were knowledgeable about the services given during antenatal care visits (AOR: 2.31, 95% CI:1.65-3.24) and mothers who had a high level of social support (AOR:1.47, 95% CI: 1.06-2.04) were more likely to attend the fourth antenatal care visit.

Conclusion: Implementation of checklist-based box system intervention resulted in a statistically significant effect in attendance of fourth antenatal care visit. Community-level variables were found to be more important in explaining variability in the fourth antenatal care visit. It is recommended that the intervention be implemented on a larger scale.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov , Retrospectively registered on 26/03/2019, with trial registration number-NCT03891030.

Keywords: Cluster randomized controlled trial; Fourth antenatal care; Northwest Ethiopia.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

© 2022. The Author(s).

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Summary of the intervention: at community, health post and health center level
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
A 12-compartment health education scheduling box. For example, if a knowledge-related factor is raised as the most common reason for missing ANC visits, the reason picking card will be placed in C-4. Health education will be focused on compartments with more cards (C-Compartment, ANC- Antenatal care, PNC- Postnatal care)
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Service utilization monitoring box. The first compartment contains a copy of a suspected pregnant mother’s referral slip. The second compartment contains mothers who received the first ANC, the third compartment contains mothers who received the second ANC, and so on. A mother’s individual folder will be transferred to the second compartment if she received her first ANC visit. Missed mothers can be easily identified and communicated with during this process. (ANC stands for antenatal care, and PNC stands for postnatal care)
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
CONSORT flow diagram for cluster trial

References

    1. WHO. Fact Sheet on Maternal, Newborn and Child Health. 2019
    1. WHO. Mother Baby Package: Implementing safe motherhood in countries. 1995
    1. Mekonnen Y, Mekonnen A. Factors Influencing the Use of Maternal Healthcare Services in Ethiopia. 2015.
    1. CSA . Ethiopian Mini Demographic and Health survey. 2014.
    1. CSA . Ethiopian Demographic and Health Survey. 2016.
    1. CSA . Ethiopia Mini demographic and health survey:Key Indicators. 2019.
    1. Federal Ministry of Health Ethiopia(FMoH) Health sector transformation plan -I. 2017. p. 142.
    1. Haruna U, Dandeebo G, Galaa SZ. Improving access and utilization of maternal healthcare services through focused antenatal Care in Rural Ghana: a qualitative study. Hindawe. 2019:5–7. 10.1155/2019/9181758.
    1. Basha GW. Factors affecting the utilization of a minimum of four antenatal Care Services in Ethiopia. Hindawe. 2019;2-5. 10.1155/2019/5036783.
    1. Wolde HF, Tsegaye AT, Sisay MM. Late initiation of antenatal care and associated factors among pregnant women in Addis Zemen primary hospital. South Reprod Health. 2019;16(73):1–8.
    1. Ali SA, Ali SA, Feroz A, Saleem S, Fatmai Z, Kadir MM. Factors affecting the utilization of antenatal care among married women of reproductive age in the rural Thatta , Pakistan : findings from a community-based case-control study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2020;4:1–12.
    1. Owoo NS, Lambon-quayefio MP. National health insurance, social influence and antenatal care use in Ghana. Health Econ Rev. 2013;3(19):10-2. .
    1. Heaman MI, Martens PJ, Brownell MD, Chartier MJ, Thiessen KR, Derksen SA, et al. Inequities in utilization of prenatal care : a population-based study in the Canadian province of Manitoba. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2018;118(430):1–18.
    1. Tadele A, Teka B. Adequacy of prenatal care services and associated factors in southern Ethiopia. Arch Public Heal. 2021;79(1):1–8. doi: 10.1186/s13690-020-00513-z.
    1. Tegegne TK, Chojenta C, Getachew T, Smith R, Loxton D. Antenatal care use in Ethiopia: a spatial and multilevel analysis. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2019;19(1):V. doi: 10.1186/s12884-019-2550-x.
    1. Tekelab T, Chojenta C, Smith R, Loxton D. Factors affecting utilization of antenatal care in Ethiopia: a systematic review and metaanalysis. PLoS One. 2019;14(4):1–24. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0214848.
    1. Federal Ministry of Health E . Health Extension program in Ethiopia. 2007. p. 12.
    1. Andargie NB, Jebena MG, Debelew GT. Effectiveness of checklist-based box system interventions (CBBSI) versus routine care on improving utilization of maternal health services in Northwest Ethiopia: study protocol for a cluster randomized controlled trial. Trials. 2020;21(1):1–9. doi: 10.1186/s13063-019-4002-3.
    1. Hemming K, Girling AJ, Sitch AJ, Marsh J, Lilford RJ. Sample size calculations for cluster randomised controlled trials with a fixed number of clusters. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2011;11(1):8. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-11-102.
    1. Limenih MA, Endale ZM, Dachew BA. Postnatal care service utilization and associated factors among women who gave birth in the last 12 months prior to the study in Debre Markos town, Northwestern Ethiopia: A Community-Based Cross-Sectional Study. Int J Reprod Med. 2016;3-7. 10.1155/2016/7095352.
    1. Pagel C, Prost A, Lewycka S, Das S, Colbourn T, Mahapatra R, et al. Intracluster correlation coefficients and coefficients of variation for perinatal outcomes from five cluster-randomised controlled trials in low and middle-income countries : results and methodological implications. BioMed Cent. 2011;12(151):8.
    1. Wang H, Tesfaye R, Ramana GN V, Chekagn CT. Ethiopia Health Extension Program. 2016
    1. Stanback J, Qureshi Z, Sekadde-Kigondu C, Gonzalez B, Nutley T. Checklist for ruling out pregnancy among family planning clients in primary care. Lancet. 1999;14:354.
    1. Ministry of Health E . Managment of Selected Obstetric Cases. 2010.
    1. WHO. Geneva: Making pregnancy safer; 2009.
    1. PRECEDE / PROCEED Model A structure for assessing health needs for the design, implementation, and evaluation of health promotion. 2018. .
    1. Green L. The PRECEDE-PROCEED Framework. 1968.
    1. Phillips JL, Rolley JX, Davidson PM. Developing targeted health service interventions using the PRECEDE-PROCEED Model : two Australian case studies. Nurs Res Pract. 2012;2012:1–7. doi: 10.1155/2012/279431.
    1. Fredriksson A, de Oliveira GM. Impact evaluation using difference-in-differences. RAUSP Manag J. 2019;54(4):519–532. doi: 10.1108/RAUSP-05-2019-0112.
    1. Diez Roux AV. A glossary for multilevel analysis. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2002;56(8):588–594. doi: 10.1136/jech.56.8.588.
    1. Merlo J, Chaix B, Yang M, Lynch J, Ra L. A brief conceptual tutorial of multilevel analysis in social epidemiology: linking the statistical concept of clustering to the idea of contextual phenomenon. J Epidemiol Community Heal. 2005;59:443–449. doi: 10.1136/jech.2004.023473.
    1. Merlo J, Chaix B, Ohlsson H, Beckman A, Johnell K, Hjerpe P. A brief conceptual tutorial of multilevel analysis in social epidemiology: using measures of clustering in multilevel logistic regression to investigate contextual phenomena. J Epidemiol Community Heal. 2006;60:290–297. doi: 10.1136/jech.2004.029454.
    1. Merlo J, Chaix B, Yang M, Lynch J, Ra L. A brief conceptual tutorial on multilevel analysis in social epidemiology: interpreting neighbourhood differences and the effect of neighbourhood characteristics on individual health. J Epidemiol Community Heal. 2005;59:1022–1029. doi: 10.1136/jech.2004.028035.
    1. Pentti J, Kawachi I, Virtanen M, Halonen JI, Kivima M, Martikainen P, et al. Quantifying Neighbourhood socioeconomic effects in clustering of behaviour-related risk Factors : a multilevel analysis. PLoS One. 2012;7(3):1–8.
    1. Larsen K, Merlo J. Appropriate assessment of neighborhood effects on individual Health : integrating random and fixed effects in multilevel logistic regression. Am J Epidemiol. 2005;161(1):81–88. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwi017.
    1. Austin PC. Intermediate and advanced topics in multilevel logistic regression analysis. Stat Med. 2017;36(May):3257–3277. doi: 10.1002/sim.7336.
    1. Ohlsson H, Lindblad U, Lithman T, Ericsson B, U-g G, Melander A. Understanding adherence to official guidelines on statin prescribing in primary health care ― a multi-level methodological approach. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2005;61(9):657–665. doi: 10.1007/s00228-005-0975-9.

Source: PubMed

3
Subskrybuj