Table 3.
Model 1 (first contacted provider) | Model 2 (first contacted provider) | Model 3 (all contacted providers to cure the case) | ||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
||||||||||
Public % | Private (allopathic & traditional) % | Statistics | Public % | Private (allopathic) % | Statistics | All public % | At least one private provider % | Statistics | ||||
| ||||||||||||
All cases | n=54 | 42.6 | 57.4 | 95% CI for private: 44–71% | n=45 | 51.1 | 48.9 | 95% CI for private: 34–64% | n=54 | 33.3 | 66.7 | 95% CI for private: 54–80% |
| ||||||||||||
Variable | p value comments | p value comments | p value comments | |||||||||
Predisposing factors | ||||||||||||
Patient age (<18, >18 years) | <18 years | 39.1 | 38.7 | 1.000 | 39.1 | 31.8 | 0.758 | 44.4 | 36.1 | 0.569 | ||
Patient sex (female, male) | female | 43.5 | 45.2 | 1.000 | 43.5 | 54.5 | 0.556 | 44.4 | 44.4 | 1.000 | ||
Sex of decision maker (female, male) | female | 45.0 | 25.0 | 0.216 6 cases missing |
45.0 | 31.6 | 0.514 6 cases missing |
40.0 | 30.3 | 0.527 6 cases missing |
||
Marital status of the household head | married | 26.1 | 12.9 | 0.351 | 26.1 | 18.2 | 0.401 | 22.2 | 16.7 | 0.806 | ||
living w/partner | 69.6 | 74.2 | 0.351 | 69.6 | 63.6 | 0.401 | 72.2 | 72.2 | 0.806 | |||
single* | 4.3 | 12.9 | 0.351 | 4.3 | 18.2 | 0.401 | 5.6 | 11.1 | 0.806 | |||
Enabling factors | ||||||||||||
Education of the household head (no formal schooling & primary not completed, primary completed & higher) | low | 43.5 | 25.8 | 0.245 | 43.5 | 18.2 | 0.065 | 50.0 | 25.0 | 0.124 | ||
Education of the person who decided where to seek care (as above) | low | 44.4 | 29.6 | 0.354 9 cases missing |
44.4 | 22.2 | 0.289 9 cases missing |
50.0 | 29.0 | 0.197 9 cases missing |
||
Decision maker had experience with the type of emergency | yes | 34.8 | 54.8 | 0.175 | 34.8 | 45.5 | 0.550 | 38.9 | 50.0 | 0.565 | ||
Patient having public health insurance | yes | 21.7 | 24.1 | 1.000 2 cases missing |
21.7 | 30.0 | 0.728 2 cases missing |
16.7 | 26.5 | 0.507 2 cases missing |
||
Household head member of a community organization | yes | 34.8 | 9.6 | 0.039† | 34.8 | 9.1 | 0.071 | 38.9 | 11.1 | 0.029† | ||
Wealth index (terciles) | low | 26.1 | 32.3 | 0.940 | 26.1 | 31.8 | 0.804 | 22.2 | 33.3 | 0.668 | ||
middle | 30.4 | 29.0 | 0.940 | 30.4 | 36.4 | 0.804 | 27.8 | 30.6 | 0.668 | |||
high | 43.5 | 38.7 | 0.940 | 43.5 | 31.8 | 0.804 | 50.0 | 36.1 | 0.668 | |||
Environmental factors | ||||||||||||
Perceived quality of the MPH system (good, moderate/bad) | good | 82.6 | 62.1 | 0.140 1 case missing |
82.6 | 61.9 | 0.179 1 case missing |
83.3 | 65.7 | 0.215 1 case missing |
||
Seasons when the case occurred (rainy, dry) | rainy | 26.1 | 35.5 | 0.560 | 26.1 | 31.8 | 0.749 | 33.3 | 30.6 | 1.000 | ||
Need factor | ||||||||||||
Perceived severity of the case (not very serious, very serious/life threat) | very serious/life threat | 63.6 | 87.1 | 0.055 1 case missing |
63.6 | 90.9 | 0.069 1 case missing |
64.7 | 83.3 | 0.167 1 case missing |
Comments: Statistically significant values are † (p<0.05);
widowed, separated, divorced, single.
CI, confidence interval; MPH, Ministry of Public Health; w/, with.