Skip to main content
Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Correlates of Obstetric Risk Perception and Recognition of Danger Signs in Kano, Northern Nigeria Cover

Correlates of Obstetric Risk Perception and Recognition of Danger Signs in Kano, Northern Nigeria

Open Access
|Oct 2019

Figures & Tables

Table 1

Socio-demographic characteristics of respondents, Kano, Nigeria, 2016.

CharacteristicsFrequency No. (%) N = 400
Sex
    Male201 (50.2)
    Female199 (49.8)
Age group
    <209 (2.3)
    20–29253 (63.3)
    30–39103 (25.8)
    ≥4035 (8.8)
Ethnicity
    Hausa303 (75.8)
    Fulani40 (10.0)
    Yoruba31 (7.7)
    Igbo11 (2.8)
    Others15 (3.7)
Religion
    Islam371 (92.8)
    Christianity29 (7.3)
Education
    No formal12 (3.0)
    Primary17 (4.3)
    Secondary129 (32.3)
    Post-Secondary242 (60.5)
Marital status
    Single224 (56.0)
    Ever Married176 (44.0)
Occupation
    Unemployed27 (6.8)
    Homemaker100 (25.0)
    Trading81 (20.2)
    Civil servant105 (26.2)
    Others+87 (21.8)
No. of children
    0294 (73.5)
    1–479 (19.8)
    ≥527 (6.8)

[i] + Farmer, Tailor/Seamstress, Driver/Commercial tricylist, Barber/Hair dresser.

Table 2

Obstetric risk perception and danger sign recognition, Kano, Nigeria, 2016.

Factors perceived to adversely affect the outcome of pregnancyFrequency No. (%) N = 400
Maternal age257 (64.3)
Previous history of abortion148 (37.0)
Previous post-partum hemorrhage144 (36.0)
Previous operative delivery127 (31.8)
Number of previous births125 (31.3)
Maternal weight89 (22.3)
Previous neonatal death85 (21.3)
Maternal height71 (17.8)
Recognition of danger symptoms/signs during pregnancy
Vaginal bleeding307 (76.8)
Seizures178 (44.5)
Severe abdominal pain139 (34.8)
Loss of consciousness112 (28.0)
Swollen hands and face98 (24.5)
High fever97 (24.3)
Severe headache92 (23.0)
Water breakage before labour90 (22.5)
Difficult breathing88 (22.0)
Accelerated/reduced fetal movement72 (18.0)
Blurred vision62 (15.5)
Others (severe weakness, pallor etc.)7 (1.8)
Recognition of danger symptoms/signs during labour
Severe bleeding311 (77.8)
Seizures222 (55.5)
Loss of consciousness153 (38.3)
High fever111 (27.8)
Labour lasting >12 hours104 (26.0)
Placenta not delivered 30 minutes after the baby104 (26.0)
Severe headache79 (19.8)
Others (hand prolapse, cord prolapse)2 (0.5)
Recognition of danger symptoms/signs after delivery
Severe bleeding322 (80.5)
Convulsion168 (42.0)
High fever114 (28.5)
Loss of consciousness112 (28.0)
Malodorous vaginal discharge89 (22.3)
Difficult breathing81 (20.3)
Blurred vision80 (20.0)
Severe headache73 (18.3)
Severe weakness/dizziness/pallor68 (17.0)
Swollen hands/face64 (16.0)
Table 3

Logistic regression model for predictors of obstetric risk perception, Kano, Nigeria, 2016.

CharacteristicsβGood obstetric risk perception No. (%) N = 168Poor obstetric risk perception No. (%) N = 232Crude Odds Ratio (95% CI)Adjusted Odds Ratio (95% CI)**P-value
Sex
    Male73 (43.5)128 (55.2)Ref
    Female95 (56.5)104 (44.8)1.6 (1.07–2.39)3.10 (1.67–5.74)0.018†
Age group
    <203 (1.8)6 (2.6)Ref
    20–29123 (73.2)130 (56.0)1.89 (0.46–7.73)4.60 (0.75–28.4)0.13
    30–3927 (16.1)76 (32.8)0.71 (0.17–3.04)2.53 (0.37–17.3)0.27
    ≥4015 (8.9)20 (8.6)1.5 (0.32–6.9)2.68 (0.35–20.5)0.51
Ethnicity
    Hausa114 (67.9)189 (81.5)Ref
    Fulani15 (8.9)25 (10.8)0.99 (0.50–1.97)1.22 (0.56–2.67)0.42
    Yoruba25 (14.9)6 (2.6)6.9 (2.75–17.35)7.53 (2.51–22.6)0.026†
    Igbo6 (3.6)5 (2.2)1.99 (0.59–6.67)3.34 (0.56–20.12)0.63
    Others8 (4.8)7 (3.0)1.89 (0.67–5.36)1.87 (0.48–7.32)0.25
Religion
    Islam150 (89.3)221 (95.3)Ref
    Christianity18 (10.7)11 (4.7)2.41 (1.11–5.25)1.01 (0.28–3.65)0.16
Education
    No formal4 (2.4)7 (3.0)Ref
    Primary1 (0.6)16 (6.9)0.11 (0.01–1.16)0.13 (0.01–1.74)0.72
    Secondary43 (25.6)87 (37.5)0.86 (0.24–3.12)0.61 (0.13–2.83)0.55
    Post-secondary120 (71.4)122 (52.6)1.72 (0.49–6.03)1.22 (0.26–5.66)0.24
Occupation
    Unemployed6 (3.6)21 (9.1)Ref
    Homemaker31 (18.5)69 (29.7)2.04 (1.10–3.79)1.41 (0.66–3.00)0.44
    Civil servant47 (28.0)58 (25.0)0.72 (0.26–2.01)0.83 (0.26–2.66)0.36
    Trading23 (13.7)58 (25.0)1.13 (0.59–2.15)0.68 (0.31–1.49)0.53
    Others+61 (36.3)26 (11.2)5.91 (3.04–11.5)4.07 (1.87–8.84)0.004†
Number of children
    0131 (78.0)163 (70.3)Ref
    1–433 (19.6)46 (19.8)0.89 (0.54–1.48)0.69 (0.32–1.52)0.15
    ≥54 (2.4)23 (9.9)0.22 (0.07–0.64)0.23 (0.06–0.92)0.012†

[i] + Farmer, Tailor/Seamstress, Driver/Commercial tricylist, Barber/Hair dresser.

** Logistic model includes the following variables: sex, age group, ethnicity, religion, education, occupation and number of children. † Significant at p < 0.05; OR: Odds Ratio, CI: confidence interval; Ref: reference group.

β ≥2 risk factors in Hobel’s abridged pregnancy risk assessment categories (obstetric history, medical history, physical, pregnancy-dependent) = good obstetric risk perception; ≤1 risk factors in Hobel’s abridged pregnancy risk assessment categories (obstetric history, medical history, physical, pregnancy-dependent) = poor obstetric risk perception [23, 24].

Table 4

Logistic regression model for predictors of danger sign recognition, Kano, Nigeria, 2016.

CharacteristicsGood knowledge of obstetric danger signs. No. (%) N = 205Poor knowledge of obstetric danger signs. No. (%) N = 195Crude Odds Ratio (95% CI)Adjusted Odds Ratio (95% CI)**P-value
Sex
    Male104 (50.7)97 (49.7)1.04 (0.70–1.54)0.63 (0.36–1.09)0.46
    Female101 (49.3)98 (50.3)Ref
Age group
    <203 (1.5)6 (3.1)Ref
    20–29126 (61.5)127 (65.1)1.98 (0.49–8.11)1.62 (0.25–10.66)0.31
    30–3955 (26.8)48 (24.6)2.29 (0.54–9.66)3.03 (0.44–20.7)0.27
    ≥4021 (10.2)14 (7.2)3.00 (0.64–14.0)1.89 (0.24–14.7)0.16
Ethnicity
    Hausa141 (68.8)162 (83.7)Ref
    Fulani21 (10.2)19 (9.7)1.27 (0.66–2.46)1.33 (0.60–2.93)0.41
    Yoruba28 (13.7)3 (1.5)10.7 (3.19–36.0)4.40 (1.10–19.2)0.029†
    Igbo5 (2.4)6 (3.1)0.96 (0.29–3.20)0.33 (0.038–2.91)0.37
    Others10 (4.9)5 (2.6)2.30 (0.77–6.88)1.65 (0.40–6.87)0.18
Religion
    Islam185 (90.2)186 (95.4)Ref
    Christianity20 (9.8)9 (4.6)2.23 (0.99–5.04)1.41 (0.31–6.42)0.26
Education
    No formal6 (2.9)5 (2.6)Ref
    Primary3 (1.5)14 (7.2)0.18 (0.03–0.99)0.20 (0.028–1.43)0.13
    Secondary61 (29.8)69 (35.4)0.74 (0.21–2.54)0.59 (0.14–2.44)0.18
    Post-Secondary135 (65.9)107 (54.9)1.05 (0.31–3.54)0.64 (0.15–2.67)0.25
Occupation
    Unemployed13 (6.3)14 (7.2)Ref
    Homemaker35 (17.1)65 (33.3)1.23 (0.68–2.20)0.78 (0.36–1.70)0.36
    Civil servant61 (29.8)44 (22.6)0.82 (0.34–1.96)0.90 (0.33–2.46)0.27
    Trading43 (21.0)38 (19.5)0.48 (0.26–0.87)0.35 (0.16–1.74)0.23
    Others+53 (25.9)34 (17.4)1.38 (0.75–2.54)0.38 (0.17–1.85)0.37
Obstetric risk Perception
    Poor68 (33.2)164 (84.1)Ref
    Good137 (66.8)31 (15.9)10.7 (6.6–17.3)12.0 (6.8–21.2)<0.001†

[i] + Farming, Tailor/Seamstress, Driver/Commercial tricylist, Barbing/Hair dresser.

** Logistic model includes the following variables: sex, age group, ethnicity, religion, education, occupation and obstetric risk perception.

† Significant at p < 0.05; OR: Odds Ratio, CI: confidence interval; Ref: reference group.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/aogh.376 | Journal eISSN: 2214-9996
Language: English
Published on: Oct 3, 2019
Published by: Ubiquity Press
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 1 issue per year

© 2019 Zubairu Iliyasu, Hadiza S. Galadanci, Abubakar Abdurrahim, Abubakar Jibo, Hamisu M. Salihu, Muktar H. Aliyu, published by Ubiquity Press
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.