Table 4.
Predictors of MNP Consumption.
| N | Number (%) MNP Users | Univariate | Multivariate 2 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RR (95% CI) 1 | p | RR (95% CI) 1 | p | |||
| Household Characteristics | ||||||
| District | ||||||
| Fenerive-Est | 200 | 104 (52.0%) | 1.14 (0.95, 1.37) | 0.17 | 0.91 (0.76, 1.10) | 0.33 |
| Vavatina | 274 | 125 (45.6%) | reference | - | reference | - |
| Household Location | ||||||
| Urban | 214 | 84 (39.3) | reference | - | reference | - |
| Rural | 260 | 145 (55.8) | 1.42 (1.16, 1.73) | <0.001 | 1.43 (1.19, 1.74) | <0.001 |
| Sex of household head | ||||||
| Male | 403 | 94 (48.1) | reference | - | - | - |
| Female | 71 | 35 (49.3) | 1.02 (0.79, 1.32) | 0.86 | - | - |
| Number of household members: | ||||||
| 1–3 | 148 | 86 (58.1) | 1.28 (1.01, 1.62) | 0.04 | 1.26 (1.00, 1.60) | 0.05 |
| 4–5 | 205 | 88 (42.9) | 0.94 (0.73, 1.21) | 0.66 | 0.91 (0.72, 1.16) | 0.46 |
| ≥6 | 121 | 55 (45.5) | reference | - | reference | - |
| Number of children under 5 years | ||||||
| 1 | 354 | 182 (51.4) | 1.33 (1.04, 1.70) | 0.02 | 0.99 (0.77, 1.27) | 0.95 |
| ≥2 | 119 | 46 (38.7) | reference | - | reference | - |
| Main source of income | ||||||
| Agriculture or livestock | 313 | 160 (51.1) | reference | - | reference | - |
| Other | 161 | 69 (42.9) | 0.84 (0.68, 1.03) | 0.10 | 0.85 (0.70, 1.05) | 0.13 |
| Household assets 3 | ||||||
| 0 | 171 | 87 (50.9) | 1.08 (0.85, 1.37) | 0.53 | - | - |
| 1 | 180 | 84 (46.7) | 0.99 (0.78, 1.26) | 0.93 | - | - |
| 2+ | 123 | 58 (47.2) | reference | - | - | - |
| Ariary spent on food per person per day 4 | ||||||
| <500 | 103 | 51 (49.5) | 1.05 (0.77, 1.43) | 0.77 | - | - |
| 500–1000 | 232 | 111 (47.8) | 1.01 (0.77, 1.34) | 0.93 | - | - |
| >1000 | 72 | 34 (47.2) | reference | - | - | - |
| Maternal Characteristics | ||||||
| Mother’s Age | ||||||
| youngest tertile (<23 years) | 158 | 79 (50.0) | 1.08 (0.86, 1.36) | 0.48 | - | - |
| middle tertile (23–29 years) | 149 | 73 (49.0) | 1.06 (0.84, 1.34) | 0.61 | - | - |
| oldest tertile (>29 years) | 167 | 77 (46.1) | reference | - | - | - |
| Maternal Literacy | ||||||
| able to easily read a newspaper | 270 | 140 (51.9) | 1.39 (1.03, 1.88) | 0.03 | 1.36 (1.03, 1.80) | 0.03 |
| reads newspaper with difficulty | 121 | 58 (47.9) | 1.28 (0.92, 1.79) | 0.14 | 1.17 (0.86, 1.60) | 0.31 |
| unable to read a newspaper | 83 | 31 (37.4) | reference | - | reference | - |
| Child Characteristics | ||||||
| Sex | ||||||
| Male | 233 | 116 (49.8) | reference | - | - | - |
| Female | 241 | 113 (46.9) | 0.94 (0.78, 1.13) | 0.53 | - | - |
| Child’s Age | ||||||
| 6–11 months | 165 | 54 (32.7) | reference | - | reference | - |
| 12–17 months | 163 | 81 (49.7) | 1.52 (1.16, 1.98) | 0.002 | 1.51 (1.17, 1.94) | 0.001 |
| 18–23 months | 146 | 94 (64.4) | 1.97 (1.53, 2.53) | <0.001 | 1.99 (1.57, 2.52) | <0.001 |
| Program Exposure | ||||||
| Mother attended a CHW meeting on IYCF in last 3 months | ||||||
| Yes | 105 | 70 (66.7) | 1.55 (1.29, 1.85) | <0.001 | 1.48 (1.25, 1.77) | <0.001 |
| No | 369 | 159 (43.1) | reference | - | reference | - |
| In the past 3 months, mother heard IYCF radio messages: | ||||||
| Everyday | 182 | 111 (61.0) | 1.97 (1.46, 2.65) | <0.001 | 1.96 (1.49, 2.59) | <0.001 |
| At least once a week, but less than everyday | 95 | 46 (48.4) | 1.56 (1.11, 2.21) | 0.01 | 1.65 (1.21, 2.25) | 0.002 |
| Less than once a week | 84 | 37 (44.1) | 1.42 (0.99, 2.05) | 0.06 | 1.49 (1.06, 2.11) | 0.02 |
| Never | 113 | 35 (31.0) | reference | reference | - | |
| Maternal Nutrition Knowledge | ||||||
| Mother has heard of iron deficiency | ||||||
| Yes | 192 | 94 (49.0) | 1.00 (0.83, 1.20) | 0.98 | - | - |
| No | 273 | 134 (49.1) | reference | - | - | - |
| Mother can name a consequence of anemia/iron deficiency | ||||||
| Yes | 342 | 167 (48.8) | 1.04 (0.84, 1.28) | 0.72 | - | - |
| No | 132 | 62 (47.0) | reference | - | - | - |
| Mother identifies children 0–23 months as particularly vulnerable to anemia/iron deficiency | ||||||
| Yes | 180 | 90 (50.0) | 1.06 (0.87, 1.28) | 0.56 | - | - |
| No | 294 | 139 (47.3) | reference | - | - | - |
| Maternal Perceptions of MNP | ||||||
| Feels confident she can explain MNP benefits to others | ||||||
| Yes | 170 | 131 (77.1) | 2.39 (1.99, 2.87) | <0.001 | 1.60 (1.37, 1.87) | <0.001 |
| No | 304 | 98 (32.2) | reference | reference | - | |
| Identifies the following as primary location to get MNP | ||||||
| CHW | 293 | 194 (66.2) | 1.49 (1.14, 1.95) | 0.004 | 1.34 (1.06, 1.69) | 0.01 |
| Other source | 72 | 32 (44.4) | reference | - | reference | - |
| Does not know location | 109 | 3 (2.8) | 0.06 (0.02, 0.19) | <0.001 | 0.08 (0.03, 0.25) | <0.001 |
| Perceives other mothers in the community use MNP | ||||||
| Yes | 82 | 65 (79.3) | 1.89 (1.61, 2.23) | <0.001 | 1.40 (1.22, 1.61) | <0.001 |
| No | 392 | 164 (41.8) | reference | - | reference | - |
| Believes her husband supports MNP | ||||||
| Yes | 377 | 184 (48.8) | 1.02 (0.79, 1.31) | 0.90 | - | - |
| No | 77 | 37 (48.1) | reference | - | - | - |
| Thinks that MNPs are affordable | ||||||
| Yes | 411 | 217 (52.8) | 0.88 (0.61, 1.27) | 0.50 | - | - |
| No | 20 | 12 (60.0) | reference | - | - | - |
1 Relative risks, 95% confidence intervals and p-values were obtained from log-binomial regression models. When the log-binomial model would not converge, a log-poisson model was used; 2 Only variables that were significant at the p < 0.2 level in the univariate model were retained in the multivariate models. Maternal perception variables were excluded from primary multivariate models due to co-linearity with program exposure variables. Multivariate models witth maternal nutrition knowledge and perception of MNP variables were built separately; 3 From a three item list that includes: transportation (bicycle, car or truck), phone (cell phone or landline) and electronics (radio or television); 4 In February 2014, 1USD was approximately 2300 ariary.