Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26133977›Full record

ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2015

Staff perspectives of barriers to women accessing birthing services in Nepal: a qualitative study.

Lesley Milne, Edwin van Teijlingen, Vanora Hundley, Padam Simkhada, Jillian Ireland

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Lesley MilneCentre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health, Faculty of Health and Social Science, Bournemouth University, Dorset, UK. lmilne@bournemouth.ac.uk.
Edwin van TeijlingenCentre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health, Faculty of Health and Social Science, Bournemouth University, Dorset, UK. vanteijlingen@bournemouth.ac.uk.
Vanora HundleyCentre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health, Faculty of Health and Social Science, Bournemouth University, Dorset, UK. vhundley@bournemouth.ac.uk.
Padam SimkhadaCentre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health, Faculty of Health and Social Science, Bournemouth University, Dorset, UK. P.P.Simkhada@ljmu.ac.uk.
Jillian IrelandCentre for Midwifery, Maternal & Perinatal Health, Faculty of Health and Social Science, Bournemouth University, Dorset, UK. jireland@bournemouth.ac.uk.
Bournemouth University · GBDorset HealthCare University NHS Foundation Trust · GBLiverpool John Moores University · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundNepal has made significant progress with regard to reducing the maternal mortality ratio but a major challenge remains the under-utilisation of skilled birth attendants who are predominantly facility based. Studies have explored women's views of the barriers to facility birth; however the voices of staff who offer services have not been studied in detail. This research explores the views of staff as to the key reasons why pregnant women do not give birth in a maternity-care facility.

methodsThis mixed methods study comprised qualitative interviews and non-participant observation. The study was conducted in two small non-governmental hospitals, one semi-rural and one urban, in Kathmandu Valley. Twenty interviews were conducted with health care providers and other staff in these hospitals. The interviews were undertaken with the aid of a Nepali translator, with some interviews being held in English. Twenty-five hours of non-participant observation was conducted in both maternity hospitals . Both observation and interview data were analysed thematically. Ethical approval was granted by the Nepal Research Health Council and Bournemouth University's Ethics Committee.

resultsKey themes that emerged from the analysis reflected barriers that women experience in accessing services at different conceptual levels and resembled the three phases of delay model by Thaddeus and Maine. This framework is used to present the barriers. First Phase Delays are: 1) lack of awareness that the facility/services exist; 2) women being too busy to attend; 3) poor services; 4) embarrassment; and 5) financial issues. Themes for the second Phase of Delay are: 1) birthing on the way; and 2) by-passing the facility in favour of one further away. The final Phase involved: 1) absence of an enabling environment; and 2) disrespectful care.

conclusionThis study highlights a multitude of barriers, not all of the same importance or occuring at the same time in the pregnancy journey. It is clear that staff are aware of many of the barriers for women in reaching the facility to give birth, and these fit with previous literature of women's views. However, staff had limited insight into barriers occuring within the facility itself and were more likely to suggest that this was a problem for other institutions and not theirs.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultFemaleHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHealth PersonnelHealth Services AccessibilityHealth Services Needs and DemandHospitals, MaternityHumansMaternal Health ServicesNepalPregnancyQualitative Research

Identifiers

PMID26133977
PMCPMC4488114
OpenAlexW1550137085

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.