quality of prenatal care and birth weights ppt

8/3/2019 Quality of Prenatal Care and Birth Weights Ppt

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/quality-of-prenatal-care-and-birth-weights-ppt 1/10



Rationaley Researchers as part and are entitled to uplift the

standards of care on a research basedimprovements.

y The Gestalt principle of being equal and belonging

together or the relatedness of situation to distinguishpositive outcome

y The interacting system of a human being by King·stheory on interpersonal relationship that bestows the

goal attainment of the person.y The researchers felt that to cater pure and holistic

care, a tool used for such a procedure must bevalidated and evaluated with reference to the DOHrecommendations.



CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

1.1Health Record during Pregnancy;

1.2Present Pregnancy;

1.3 Instruction on the Warning Signs of Pregnancy;

1.4 Past and Present Illness/Health Problems;

1.5 Immunization Record;

1.6 Treatment and other services;

1.7 Health Maintenance; and

1.8 Health Teachings?

Hospital

Health Center Birthing Clinic

HYPOTHESISThere is no significant relationship

between the quality of prenatal carerendered by different institutions topregnant women and the birthweight of their newborns.

Contingency Tables

Scoreboard Simple Percentage

P=F/N X 100Where:

P = Percentage 100 = ConstantF = Frequency

N = Rating in prenatal care quality and Number of BirthWeights in each category.

Weighted Mean

fx = f5 (5) + f4 (4)+ f3 (3)+ f2 (2)+ f1 (1)+ f0 (0)N

Chi Square2

X = (Observed frequency ² E xpected frequency)E xpected frequency



Data Gathering

Permission letters to conduct the study were

prepared by the researchers with the signatures of theDean of the College of Nursing and Research Adviser. It

was personally handled to the head of the researchenvironments for due approval. As soon as the permissions

were granted, the researchers searched for subjects who fit

the criteria. The researchers interviewed the subjects fromthe hospital while the records of the samples from thehealth center and birthing center were reviewed, and

utilized the prenatal care checklists. The scores from thechecklists and the birth weights were placed on the

contingency table for each facility. The summary of thegathered data in the contingency table were tallied in the

scoreboard. The researchers tabulated the data, analyzedthe statistical results and interpreted the data.



PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS andINTERPRETATION OF DATA

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

8. Health Teachings

7. Health Maintenance

6. Treatment and other services

5. Immunization Record

4. Past and Present Illness/Health Problems

3. Instruction on the Warning Signs of Pregnancy

2. Present Pregnancy

1. Health Record during Pregnancy

8. Health

Teachings

7. Health

Maintenance

6. Treatmentand other services

5.Immunization

Record

4. Past andPresent

Illness/Health

Problems

3. Instruction

on theWarning

Signs of

Pregnancy

2. Present

Pregnancy

1. HealthRecord

during

Pregnancy

BirthingCenter 62 93 40 80 81 82 81 60

HealthCenter 40 100 48 100 72 81 79 91

Hospital 61 90 49 100 92 92 87 80

PRENATAL CARE QUALITY CHECKLISTCATEGORIES:

1. DOH-BASED PRENATAL CARE QUALITY COMPLIANCE



Excellent20%

Very

Satisfactory

60%

Satisfactory20%

Unsatisfactory

0% Poor

0%

Hospital

Figure 2.1-2.3Quality of prenatal care per institution.

Excellent

0%

Very

Satisfactory

60%

Satisfactory

40%

Unsatisfactory

0%Poor

0%

Health Center

Excellent

5%

Very Satisfactory

40%Satisfactory

55%

Unsatisfactory

0%

Poor

0%Birthing Center



Extremely Low

Birth Weight

0%

Very Low Birth

Weght

0%

Low Birth

Weight

19%

Normal Birth

Weight

52%

Large Birth

Weight

29%

Hospital

Figure 3.1-3.3. BirthWeight of the newborns per institution

Extremely Low

Birth Weight

0%

Very Low Birth

Weght

15%

Low Birth

Weight

25%Normal Birth

Weight

40%

Large Birth

Weight

20%

Health Center

Extremely Low

Birth Weight

0%

Very Low Birth

Weght

0%

Low Birth Weight

15%

Normal BirthWeight

65%

Large Birth Weight

20%

Birthing Center



Quality of Prenatal

Care

HOSPITAL HEALTHCENTER BIRTHING FACILITY

E xcellent

20 % 0 5 %Very Satisfactory 60 % 60 % 40 %

Satisfactory 20 % 40 % 55 %Unsatisfactory 0 0 0Poor 0 0 0TOTAL 100 % 100 % 100 %

Birth Weights

E xtremely Low Birth

Weight0 0 0

Very Low Birth

Weight0 15 % 0

Low Birth Weight 20 % 25 % 15 %

Normal Birth

Weight55 % 40 % 65 %

Large Birth Weight 25 % 20 % 20 %

TOTAL 100 % 100 % 100 %Table 4 Scoreboard of Prenatal Care Quality and Birth Weights

(Percentage)



FACILITY Weighted Mean Interpretation

Hospital 4.0 Very Satisfactory

Health Center 3.6 Very SatisfactoryBirthing Center 3.5 Very Satisfactory

Table 5. Average Grade of Prenatal Care Quality for each facility

Facility X2 df cv Decision Interpretation

Hospital 18.591 16 26.296 Failed to reject

the null

hypothesis.

There is no significant

relationship between

prenatal care and birth

weight.

Health

Center

27.172 16 26.296 Reject the null

hypothesis

There is a significant



weight.

Birthing

Center

21.0168 16 26.296 Failed to rejectthe null

hypothesis.

There is no significant



weight.

4. Relationship between PrenatalC

are Quality and Birth Weights



y There is a significant relationship between quality ofprenatal care and birth weight the Health Centers.

y The relationship between prenatal care onprimigravida mothers and birth weight of newborns

can be assessed using DOH recommendations onproper prenatal care.

y The quality of prenatal care by the different health

care providers (Hospital, Health Centers andBirthingCenters) can be evaluated and validated

using DOH recommendations.

y The quality of healthcare provider-primigravida

mothers interactions can be appraised usingImogene King·s Interacting Systems Framework and

Goal-Attainment Theory.

Conclusions

quality of prenatal care and birth weights ppt

Documents