Cargando…

Progress and gaps in reproductive health services in three humanitarian settings: mixed-methods case studies

BACKGROUND: Reproductive health (RH) care is an essential component of humanitarian response. Women and girls living in humanitarian settings often face high maternal mortality and are vulnerable to unwanted pregnancy, unsafe abortion, and sexual violence. This study explored the availability and qu...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Casey, Sara E, Chynoweth, Sarah K, Cornier, Nadine, Gallagher, Meghan C, Wheeler, Erin E
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4331815/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25798189
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1752-1505-9-S1-S3
_version_ 1782357785208422400
author Casey, Sara E
Chynoweth, Sarah K
Cornier, Nadine
Gallagher, Meghan C
Wheeler, Erin E
author_facet Casey, Sara E
Chynoweth, Sarah K
Cornier, Nadine
Gallagher, Meghan C
Wheeler, Erin E
author_sort Casey, Sara E
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Reproductive health (RH) care is an essential component of humanitarian response. Women and girls living in humanitarian settings often face high maternal mortality and are vulnerable to unwanted pregnancy, unsafe abortion, and sexual violence. This study explored the availability and quality of, and access barriers to RH services in three humanitarian settings in Burkina Faso, Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), and South Sudan. METHODS: Data collection was conducted between July and October 2013. In total, 63 purposively selected health facilities were assessed: 28 in Burkina Faso, 25 in DRC, and nine in South Sudan, and 42 providers completed a questionnaire to assess RH knowledge and attitudes. Thirty-four focus group discussions were conducted with 29 members of the host communities and 273 displaced married and unmarried women and men to understand access barriers. RESULTS: All facilities reported providing some RH services in the prior three months. Five health facilities in Burkina Faso, six in DRC, and none in South Sudan met the criteria as a family planning service delivery point. Two health facilities in Burkina Faso, one in DRC, and two in South Sudan met the criteria as an emergency obstetric and newborn care service delivery point. Across settings, three facilities in DRC adequately provided selected elements of clinical management of rape. Safe abortion was unavailable. Many providers lacked essential knowledge and skills. Focus groups revealed limited knowledge of available RH services and socio-cultural barriers to accessing them, although participants reported a remarkable increase in use of facility-based delivery services. CONCLUSION: Although RH services are being provided, the availability of good quality RH services was inconsistent across settings. Commodity management and security must be prioritized to ensure consistent availability of essential supplies. It is critical to improve the attitudes, managerial and technical capacity of providers to ensure that RH services are delivered respectfully and efficiently. In addition to ensuring systematic implementation of good quality RH services, humanitarian health actors should meaningfully engage crisis-affected communities in RH programming to increase understanding and use of this life-saving care.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4331815
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-43318152015-03-20 Progress and gaps in reproductive health services in three humanitarian settings: mixed-methods case studies Casey, Sara E Chynoweth, Sarah K Cornier, Nadine Gallagher, Meghan C Wheeler, Erin E Confl Health Research BACKGROUND: Reproductive health (RH) care is an essential component of humanitarian response. Women and girls living in humanitarian settings often face high maternal mortality and are vulnerable to unwanted pregnancy, unsafe abortion, and sexual violence. This study explored the availability and quality of, and access barriers to RH services in three humanitarian settings in Burkina Faso, Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), and South Sudan. METHODS: Data collection was conducted between July and October 2013. In total, 63 purposively selected health facilities were assessed: 28 in Burkina Faso, 25 in DRC, and nine in South Sudan, and 42 providers completed a questionnaire to assess RH knowledge and attitudes. Thirty-four focus group discussions were conducted with 29 members of the host communities and 273 displaced married and unmarried women and men to understand access barriers. RESULTS: All facilities reported providing some RH services in the prior three months. Five health facilities in Burkina Faso, six in DRC, and none in South Sudan met the criteria as a family planning service delivery point. Two health facilities in Burkina Faso, one in DRC, and two in South Sudan met the criteria as an emergency obstetric and newborn care service delivery point. Across settings, three facilities in DRC adequately provided selected elements of clinical management of rape. Safe abortion was unavailable. Many providers lacked essential knowledge and skills. Focus groups revealed limited knowledge of available RH services and socio-cultural barriers to accessing them, although participants reported a remarkable increase in use of facility-based delivery services. CONCLUSION: Although RH services are being provided, the availability of good quality RH services was inconsistent across settings. Commodity management and security must be prioritized to ensure consistent availability of essential supplies. It is critical to improve the attitudes, managerial and technical capacity of providers to ensure that RH services are delivered respectfully and efficiently. In addition to ensuring systematic implementation of good quality RH services, humanitarian health actors should meaningfully engage crisis-affected communities in RH programming to increase understanding and use of this life-saving care. BioMed Central 2015-02-02 /pmc/articles/PMC4331815/ /pubmed/25798189 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1752-1505-9-S1-S3 Text en Copyright © 2015 Casey et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Casey, Sara E
Chynoweth, Sarah K
Cornier, Nadine
Gallagher, Meghan C
Wheeler, Erin E
Progress and gaps in reproductive health services in three humanitarian settings: mixed-methods case studies
title Progress and gaps in reproductive health services in three humanitarian settings: mixed-methods case studies
title_full Progress and gaps in reproductive health services in three humanitarian settings: mixed-methods case studies
title_fullStr Progress and gaps in reproductive health services in three humanitarian settings: mixed-methods case studies
title_full_unstemmed Progress and gaps in reproductive health services in three humanitarian settings: mixed-methods case studies
title_short Progress and gaps in reproductive health services in three humanitarian settings: mixed-methods case studies
title_sort progress and gaps in reproductive health services in three humanitarian settings: mixed-methods case studies
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4331815/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25798189
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1752-1505-9-S1-S3
work_keys_str_mv AT caseysarae progressandgapsinreproductivehealthservicesinthreehumanitariansettingsmixedmethodscasestudies
AT chynowethsarahk progressandgapsinreproductivehealthservicesinthreehumanitariansettingsmixedmethodscasestudies
AT corniernadine progressandgapsinreproductivehealthservicesinthreehumanitariansettingsmixedmethodscasestudies
AT gallaghermeghanc progressandgapsinreproductivehealthservicesinthreehumanitariansettingsmixedmethodscasestudies
AT wheelererine progressandgapsinreproductivehealthservicesinthreehumanitariansettingsmixedmethodscasestudies