Skip to main content
. 2014 Aug 7;12:42. doi: 10.1186/1478-4491-12-42

Table 5.

Integration indicators by health facility characteristics

  Service Availability in MCH/FP Unit (out of 5) Service Availability in Facility (out of 8) Human Resources Integration (out of 5) Physical Resources Integration (out of 5)
 
 Baseline
 Endline
 Baseline
 Endline
 Baseline
 Endline
 Baseline
 Endline
Country
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
Kenya (n = 30)
 2.23
 2.3
 6.1
 6.56
 1.88
 1.93
 1.28
 1.29
Swaziland (n = 10)
 2.2
 2.3
 6.7
 7
 1.36
 1.01
 1.15
 1.18
HR integration
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
More integrated (top 20%)
 2.69b
 3.11c
 6.38
 7.11b
 2.62d
 2.88d
 1.58
 1.09b
Less integrated (bottom 80%)
 2
 2.06
 6.19
 6.52
 1.33
 1.34
 1.10
 1.86
Change in HR integration
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
Most changed (top 20%)
 1.75
 2.50
 6.00
 7.00
 1.17
 2.01a
 0.67
 1.36a
Least changed (bottom 80%)
 2.34
 2.25
 6.31
 6.56
 1.90
 1.61
 1.40
 1.24
Facility type
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
Hospital (n = 2)
 3
 3
 8
 8
 2.77
 1.79
 0.98
 0.59
District Hospital (n = 5)
 2.2
 2.4
 7.8
 7.82
 1.94
 2.34
 1.37
 0.9
Sub-District Hospital (n = 6)
 2
 1.84
 6.33
 6.36
 2
 1.75
 1.16
 1.03
Health Centre (n = 17)
 1.41
 1.52
 5.35
 6.18a
 1.15
 1.21
 0.71
 0.95a
Public Health Unit (n = 2)
 2.5
 3
 5.5
 6.5
 0.77
 0.35a
 0.88
 0.8
SRH Clinic (n = 8)
 3.87
 3.87
 6.87
 6.87
 2.72
 2.54
 2.58
 2.6
Location
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
Rural (n = 23)
 1.57
 1.61
 5.61
 6.24a
 1.37
 1.35
 0.83
 0.97
Urban (n = 17)
 3.11
 3.23
 7.12
 7.24
 2.26
 2.13
 1.83
 1.64
Ownership type
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
Private (n = 8)
 3.87
 3.87
 6.87
 6.87
 2.72
 2.54
 2.58
 2.6
Public (n = 32) 1.81 1.91 6.09 6.63 1.51 1.47 0.92 0.92

adifference from baseline significant at the P < 0.10 level.

bdifference from 'less integrated' group significant at the P < 0.10 level.

cdifference from 'less integrated' group significant at the P < 0.05 level.

ddifference from 'less integrated' group significant at the P < 0.00 level.