Search

Background: Effective antenatal care is fundamental to the promotion of positive maternal and new-born outcomes. International guidance recommends an initial visit in the first trimester of pregnancy, with a minimum of four antenatal visits in total: the optimum schedule being eight antenatal contacts. In low- and middle-income countries, many women do not access antenatal care until later in pregnancy and few have the recommended number of contacts., Aim: To gain understanding of women's antenatal experiences in Tanzania and Zambia, and the factors that influence antenatal engagement., Methods: The study was underpinned by Strauss's grounded theory methodology. Interviews were conducted with 48 women, 16 partners, 21 health care providers and 11 stakeholders, and analysed using constant comparison., Findings: The core category was 'The tipping point of antenatal engagement', supported by four categories: awareness of health benefits, experiential motivators, influential support, and environmental challenges. Although participants recognised the importance of antenatal care to health outcomes, individual motivations and external influences determined attendance or non-attendance. The 'tipping point' for antenatal engagement occurred when women believed that any negative impact could be offset by tangible gain. For some women non-attendance was a conscious decision, for others it was an unchallenged cultural norm., Conclusion: A complex interplay of factors determines antenatal engagement. Short-term modifiable factors to encourage attendance include the development of strategies for increasing respectful care; use of positive women's narratives, and active community engagement. Further research is required to develop innovative, cost-effective care models that improve health literacy and meet women's needs., (Crown Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Quality of maternal and newborn care is integral to positive clinical, social and psychological outcomes. Respectful care is an important component of this but is suboptimum in many low-income settings. A renewed energy among health professionals and academics is driving an international agenda to eradicate disrespectful health facility care around the globe. However, few studies have explored respectful care from different vantage points., Methods: We used Strauss and Corbin's grounded theory methodology to explore intrapartum experiences in Tanzania and Zambia. In-depth interviews were conducted with 98 participants (48 women, 18 partners, 21 health-providers and 11 key stakeholders), resulting in data saturation. Analysis involved constant comparison, comprising three stages of coding: open, axial and selective. The process involved application of memos, reflexivity and positionality., Results: Findings demonstrated that direct and indirect social discrimination led to inequity of care. Health-providers were believed to display manipulative behaviours to orchestrate situations for their own or the woman's benefit, and were often caring against the odds , in challenging environments. Emergent categories were related to the core category: respectful care, an added extra , which reflects the notion that women did not always expect or receive respectful care, and tolerated poor experiences to obtain services believed to benefit them or their babies. Respectful care was not seen as a component of good quality care, but a luxury that only some receive., Conclusion: Both quality of care and respectful care were valued but were not viewed as mutually inclusive. Good quality treatment (transactional care) was often juxtaposed with disrespectful care; with relational care having a lower status among women and healthcare providers. To readdress the balance, respectful care should be a predominant theme in training programmes, policies and audits. Women's and health-provider voices are pivotal to the development of such interventions., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)