Table 4 |
||||
|
Factors influencing men's participation in antenatal care with their partners in Mbale district, Uganda (N = 387) |
||||
|
Factor (Variable) |
Not Attended ANC n = 369 |
Attended ANC n = 18 |
Unadjusted OR (95% CI) |
Adjusted OR (95% CI) |
|
|
||||
|
Age (years) |
||||
|
19-29 |
142 |
4 |
1.0 |
|
|
30+ |
227 |
14 |
2.2 (0.7-6.8) |
|
|
Residence |
||||
|
Rural |
236 |
14 |
1.0 |
|
|
Urban |
133 |
4 |
0.5 (0.2-1.6) |
|
|
Education (years) |
||||
|
0-7 |
222 |
9 |
1.0 |
|
|
8+ |
147 |
9 |
1.5 (0.6-3.9) |
|
|
Religion |
||||
|
Other |
188 |
5 |
1.0 |
|
|
Christian |
181 |
13 |
2.7 (0.9-7.7) |
|
|
Occupation |
||||
|
Other |
344 |
12 |
1.0 |
1.0 |
|
Professional |
25 |
6 |
6.9 (2.4-20)** |
5.4 (1.7-17)** |
|
Knows his HIV sero-status |
||||
|
No |
335 |
12 |
1.0 |
|
|
Yes |
34 |
6 |
4.9 (1.7-14)** |
|
|
Bothers to know what goes on in ANC |
||||
|
No |
276 |
6 |
1.0 |
1.0 |
|
Yes |
93 |
12 |
5.2 (1.9-14)** |
3.1 (1.2-9.2)* |
|
Knows his wife's ANC appointments |
||||
|
No |
172 |
1 |
1.0 |
1.0 |
|
Yes |
197 |
17 |
14.8 (2 - 110)** |
8.6 (1.0-72)* |
|
Discussed with wife ANC interventions |
||||
|
No |
267 |
6 |
1.0 |
|
|
Yes |
102 |
12 |
5.2 (2.0-14)** |
|
|
Willing to go for HIV test |
||||
|
No |
122 |
1 |
1.0 |
|
|
Yes |
247 |
17 |
8.4 (1.1-63)* |
|
|
Ever heard of PMTCT |
||||
|
No |
249 |
8 |
1.0 |
|
|
Yes |
120 |
10 |
2.6 (1.0-6.7)* |
|
|
Would go with wife for VCT |
||||
|
No |
205 |
4 (2) |
1.0 |
1.0 |
|
Yes |
164 |
14 (8) |
4.4 (1.4-13) |
3.6 (1.1-12) |
|
|
||||
|
Notes: I. * is 0.01 ≤ P ≤ 0.05 and ** is P < 0.01. II. All variables in the above table were entered in the final multivariate logistic regression model. III. OR, odds ratio; CI, confidence interval; PMTCT, prevention of mother-to-child transmission of HIV; HIV, Human immunodeficiency virus; ANC, antenatal care. |
||||
|
Byamugisha et al. Reproductive Health 2010 7:12 doi:10.1186/1742-4755-7-12 |
||||
