RURAL HOUSEHOLDS UTILIZATION OF PRIMARY HEALTH CARE FACILITIES IN OHAFIA AGRICULTURAL ZONE, ABIA STATE, NIGERIA

  • 0 Review(s)

Product Category: Projects

Product Code: 00009225

No of Pages: 71

No of Chapters: 1-5

File Format: Microsoft Word

Price :

₦5000

  • $

ABSTRACT

This study assessed rural households’ utilization of  primary health care facilities in Ohafia agricultural zone of Abia State, Nigeria. The specific objectives were to describe selected socio-economic characteristics of respondents; assess rural households perception about primary health care facilities; determine extent of rural households participation in primary health care facilities, among others. A multistage sampling procedure was employed in the selection of 180 respondents as sample size. Primary data were collected with the use of structured interview schedule and analyzed with both descriptive and inferential statistical tools. The result of the study revealed that majority of the respondents (93.89%) were males, middle aged with mean age of 30.74 years. Majority (89.44%) were married and on the average had household size of 4 persons. It was also observed that the respondents had 5.25 years as mean years of schooling with mean distance of 3.31 kilometres to the nearest PHC facility. The result also showed that respondents had positive perception about primary health care facilities (Grand mean = 2.93), their participation was low (Grand mean = 1.94), recorded high utilization (Grand mean = 2.09) of primary health care services. The results show weak financial position of rural households (  = 3.16), lack of awareness and enlightenment (  3.09),inflexibility of PHC programmes to adapt to community circumstance ( =3.08), among others were perceived constraints militating against rural households participation in PHC facilities implementation activities in the study area. It was also observed that poor households income ( =3.11), high cost of services ( =3.09), absence of qualified doctors and nurses ( 3.09), among others were perceived constraints militating against their utilization of PHC services.  The H01 was rejected (F-value = 663.831*** at P<0.05) with R2 = 0.958 which implies that 95.8% of the total variation in the dependent variables was accounted for by the explanatory variables. Meaning that socio-economic characteristics of respondents have significant relationship with utilization of PHC services in the study area. The test of no significant relationship between participation and utilization (Ho2) was rejected as the F-value was 404.257*** at P<0.05 which shows the overall significance of the regression line and coefficient of determination (R2) value of 0.921 which implies that 92.1% of the total variation in the dependent variable was accounted for by the explanatory variables. It was concluded that participation of respondent at the stages of establishment of PHC facilities enhances utilization of PHC services. It is recommended that intended benefiting rural communities should be included in the initiation stage of primary health facility as to promote participation and utilization of PHC facility.






TABLE OF CONTENTS

Title Page                                                                                                                                i

Declaration                                                                                                                               ii                                                                                                                                   

Certification                                                                                                                            iii

Dedication                                                                                                                                iv                                                                                                                                                           

Acknowledgement                                                                                                                  v

Table of Contents                                                                                                                   vi

List of Tables                                                                                                                          ix

List of Figures                                                                                                                         x

Abstract                                                                                                                                   xi

 

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

1.1       Background of the Study                                                                                            1

1.2       Problem Statement                                                                                                     3

1.3       Research Questions                                                                                                    4

1.4       Objectives of the Study                                                                                              4

1.5       Hypotheses of the Study                                                                                             5

1.6       Significance of the Study                                                                                           5

1.7       Scope of the Study                                                                                                      6

1.8       Definition of Terms                                                                                                    6

1.9       Limitations of the Study                                                                                             7

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1       Conceptual Review                                                                                                     8

2.1.1    Community Participation                                                                                           8

2.1.1.1 Passive participation                                                                                                  8

2.1.1.2 Information giving participation                                                                                9

2.1.1.3Participation by consultation                                                                                       9

2.1.1.4Participation for incentive                                                                                           9

2.1.1.5 Functional participation                                                                                             9

2.1.1.6 Interactive participation                                                                                             9

2.1.1.7 Spontaneous mobilization                                                                                          9

2.1.2    Utilization of primary health care services                                                                 10

2.1.3    Factors influencing participation and utilization of primary health care services           11

2.1.4    Constraints to participation and utilization of primary health care services           12

2.2       Theoretical Framework                                                                                              13

2.2.1    Buchanan and Tullock’s theory of participation                                                        13

2.2.2    The theory of margin                                                                                                  14

2.2.3    Structural functionalism theory                                                                                  15

2.3       Review of Empirical Studies                                                                                      16

2.4       Conceptual Framework                                                                                              17

 

CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1       Study Area                                                                                                                  19

3.2       Population of Study                                                                                                    20

3.3       Sample and Sampling Procedure                                                                                20

3.4       Data Collection                                                                                                           20

3.5       Validity of Instrument                                                                                                21

3.6       Reliability of Instrument                                                                                            21

3.7       Data Analysis                                                                                                              21

3.8       Measurement of variables                                                                                          21

3.8.1    Socio-economic characteristics of respondents                                                          21

3.8.2    Rural households perceptions about primary health care facilities                           22

3.8.3    Extent of rural households participation in PHC facilitates                                       22

3.8.4    Extent of utilization of primary health care services by rural households                  22

3.8.5    Constraints associated with participation in primary health care facilities.                     23

3.8.6    Constraint associated with rural household utilization of  primary health Care Services;                                                                                                  23

3.9       Test of Hypotheses                                                                                                     23

3.10     Model Specification                                                                                                   24

CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

4.1       Socio-Economic Characteristics of Rural Households                                              27

4.1.1    Age                                                                                                                             27

4.1.2    Sex                                                                                                                              27

4.1.3    Marital status                                                                                                             27

4.1.4    Household size                                                                                                           28

4.1.5    Years of schooling                                                                                                      28

4.1.6    Distance to PHC facility                                                                                             28

4.1.7    Estimated annual income                                                                                            29

4.2       Rural Households Perception about Primary Health Care Facilities                         32

4.3       Extent of Rural Households Participation in PHC Facilities                                     34

4.4       Extent of Utilization of  Primary Health Care Services by Rural Household        36

4.5       Constraints Associated with Rural Households Participation in  PHC Facilities         38

4.6       Constraints Associated with Rural Households Utilization of  PHC Services           40

4.7       Test of hypotheses                                                                                                      42

4.7.1    Regression estimate of the relationship between socio-economic

characteristics of respondents and the utilization of  PHC services                           42

4.7.2    Regression estimate of the relationship between rural household’s

participation and  utilization of  PHC facilities                                                         45

 

CHAPTER 5: SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1       Summary                                                                                                                     48

5.2       Conclusion                                                                                                                  49

5.3       Recommendations                                                                                                      49

References

Appendices








 

                           LIST OF TABLES


4.1: Selected socio-economic characteristics of rural households                                              30

4.2: Mean rating of rural households perceptions about primary care facilities                     33

4.3: Mean rating of rural households participation in PHC facilities                                    35

4.4: Mean rating of rural households utilization of primary health care services                    37

4.5: Mean rating of rural households perceived constraints associated

       with participation in  PHC facilities                                                                                39

4.6: Mean rating of rural households perceived constraints associated with

        utilization of  PHC services                                                                                             41

4.7: Ordinary least square regression (OLS) the relationship

        between selected socio-economic characteristics of  PHC services                               44

 

4.8: Ordinary least square regression table of the test of relationship

        between participation and utilization of PHCs by respondents.                                      47

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

LIST OF FIGURE


1: Conceptual framework                                                                                           18

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

 


 

 

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION


1.1       BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY

The importance of health to national development and poverty reduction has been appreciating over the centuries, in that improving health status and increasing life expectancy contribute to long term economic development. The legitimacy of any national health system depends on how best it serves the interest of the poorest and most vulnerable people, for which improvements in the health status contributes significantly to the attainment of the desired rural development goals through poverty reduction (Abiodun, 2010; Abdulraheem, et al., 2012; Omuta, et al., 2014).

Consequently, the key purpose of any health care system is to provide universal access to appropriate, efficient, effective and quality health services, in order to improve on; and promote people’s health. Many developing countries, especially those in Sub-Saharan Africa, in the 1970s experienced remarkable and unacceptable inequalities in the provision and distribution of health services. This explained the exploration of different approaches to improve health care delivery by international health organizations in the 1970s (Omuta, et al., 2014).

Rural community-based primary health care facilities are primary health care facilities that are situated in the rural communities they serve with main concern for the health care needs of the rural people who live nearby (Oladipo, 2014). This proximity is important; it makes it easier for people to come for personal health care or to attend group discussions or community meetings. For older or disabled people and mothers with their babies and toddlers, it is especially important that the services should be within easy walking distance or within easy reach by public transport.

Primary Health Care (PHC) is driven by a political philosophy that emphasizes a radical change in both the design and content of conventional health care services. It also advocates an approach to health care principles that allow people to receive health care that enables them to live socially and economically productive lives. The Alma-Ata Declaration of 1978 defined the concept of PHC as essential care based on practical, scientifically sound and socially acceptable health care methods and technologies, made universally accessible to individual and families in the community through their full participation and at a cost that the community and country can afford to maintain at every stage of their development in the spirit of self-reliance and self-determination (World Health Organization, 2008; World Bank, 2010, Sanda, 2014).

Rural household is the main actor in the rural space, owner of the main (natural, human, economic, cultural) resource, which it uses at his own discretion and whose behavior is very important for the society where it belongs (Lorena and Dona, 2017).  Their participation in rural community-based primary health care facilities includes people’s involvement in the decision making process, attending meetings, contributing to primary health facility projects in their communities as well as their implementation (Wellington, 2010; Ofuoku, 2011; Adefila, 2012; Ogunleye and Oladeinde, 2013).

Primary health care utilization refers to the use of health care services. People use health care for many reasons including preventive and curing health problems, promoting maintenance of health and well-being, or obtaining information about health status and prognosis (Omotoso, 2010; Ayodeji and Michael, 2015).


1.2       PROBLEM STATEMENT

Health care participation and utilization are major interest to rural development because they are vital elements of wellbeing and components of human capital (Aghion, et al., 2010). In rural areas, where physical jobs tend to be more abundant, health care access and utilization stand to be more important than education in determining labour productivity (Titus, et al., 2015). Policy makers and regional analysts are concerned about the decline in participation in rural development activities (primary health care facilities inclusive) by the rural people who are being protected by the practice of participatory development (Ibama and Chikaobum, 2017). Rural households participation in most rural development projects initiated by government appear to be afterthought. Most often community members are consulted after decisions are made by government agencies with regards to the kind of rural development projects that need to be implemented (Ibama and Chikagbum, 2017). As a consequence, rural development projects which are intended to improve the quality of life of the majority of rural communities in Nigeria do not meet this objective due to lack of participation by intended beneficiaries.

The essence of primary health care is the provision of essential health services to the host communities. However, there has been a growing lack of confidence by the populace as evidence by poor utilization of the services of primary health care facilities (Esimai, et al., 2002; Sule, et al., 2008; Mojekwu and Ibekwe, 2012; Muhammed, et al., 2013).

Given the fact that rural households participation and utilization of rural-community-based health facilities in Abia State, Nigeria has hitherto not seen assessed hence, the need for this study. Based on the foregoing this study therefore, addressed the following research questions.


1.3       RESEARCH QUESTIONS

This study was guided by the following research questions:

i.               What are the socio-economic characteristics of respondents?

ii.              What are the rural households’ perception primary health care facilities?

iii.            What is the extent of rural households’ participation in primary health care facilities?

iv.            What is the extent of utilization of primary health care services by rural households?

v.              What are the constraints associated with rural households’ participation in primary health care facilities?

vi.            What are the constraint associated with rural households utilization of primary health care services in the study area.


1.4       OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

The broad objective of this study was to determine rural households’ participation and utilization of rural community-based primary health care facilities in Ohafia Agricultural Zone, Abia State, Nigeria. The specific objectives of the study were to:

i.               describe selected socio-economic characteristics of respondents;

ii.              assess rural households’ perception primary health care facilities;

iii.            determine the extent of rural households’ participation in primary health care facilities;

iv.            determine the extent of utilization of primary health care services by rural households;

v.              examine the constraints associated with rural households participation in primary health care facilities;

vi.            examine the constraints associated with rural households’ utilization of  primary health care services in the study area.


1.5       HYPOTHESES

The following hypotheses were tested:

H01: There is no significant relationship between socio-economic characteristics of   respondents and their utilizationofprimary health care services.

H02:  There is no significant relationship between rural household’s participation and utilization of primary health care facilities in the study area.


1.6       SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

The study was necessary because it added both practical and theoretical significance to knowledge. Apart from contributing to the existing literatures on rural households participation and utilization of rural community-based primary health care facilities, the study will enable relevant stakeholders and actors in primary health care to realize the importance of rural households participation, understand the constraints or barriers to rural households participation, strategies to enhance participation as to ensure sustainability of rural community-based primary health care facilities, among others.

It will also contribute to better understanding of accountability and the realization of an alternative vision  which urges that through participation, rural households are enable and can determine and control the allocation of development resources and not merely influence its direction.

Furthermore, the results will be utilized to encourage and improve the participation of rural households in rural development projects, thereby contributing towards improving the quality of human lives. The study serves as an entry point for further research undertaking in areas of rural households participation in rural community-based primary health care facilities and other rural development projects in the study area, and the country as a whole.


1.7       SCOPE OF THE STUDY

The study covered Ohafia Agricultural Zone, Abia State in the South-East zone of Nigeria and delimited to rural households participation and utilization of rural community-based primary health care facilities with six objectives which included description of the selected socio-economic characteristics of the respondents, rural households perceptions about rural community-based primary health care facilities, determination of rural households extent of utilization of rural community-based primary health care facilities.


1.8       DEFINITION OF TERMS

The under listed words as used in this study are defined below:

Participation: People’s involvement in the decision making process, attending meetings, contributing to community projects and implementing programmes.

Rural Development: Implies a process of increasing productivity and standards of living in rural areas (Ekong, 2010).

Rural Household: Is a rural production workshop, based on the work of a family, group, consumption needs (Ekong, 2010).

Decision Making: Having a say about actions that affect their lives.

Rural Community: Is a geographical area that is located outside towns and cities (Ekong, 2010).

Utilization: Use of health care services (Omotoso, 2010).

Access: The timely use of personal health service to achieve the best possible health outcomes (Ronald, et al., 2014).

Primary Health Care: Is a grassroot approach meant to address the health problems in communities (Abdulraheem et al., 2012; Olise, 2012).


1.9       LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY

There were limitations in the process of carrying this study and they included the following:The household heads initially thought they were going to be paid for the study but after the researcher explained the purpose of the study and the importance of the validity of study the respondents were able to supplied the necessary responses or information needed.

Also, inadequate funds to support the study slowed down movement as at when planned. However, efforts were put in place to overcome these problems in order to reduce the time frame for data collection.


 

Click “DOWNLOAD NOW” below to get the complete Projects

FOR QUICK HELP CHAT WITH US NOW!

+(234) 0814 780 1594

Buyers has the right to create dispute within seven (7) days of purchase for 100% refund request when you experience issue with the file received. 

Dispute can only be created when you receive a corrupt file, a wrong file or irregularities in the table of contents and content of the file you received. 

ProjectShelve.com shall either provide the appropriate file within 48hrs or send refund excluding your bank transaction charges. Term and Conditions are applied.

Buyers are expected to confirm that the material you are paying for is available on our website ProjectShelve.com and you have selected the right material, you have also gone through the preliminary pages and it interests you before payment. DO NOT MAKE BANK PAYMENT IF YOUR TOPIC IS NOT ON THE WEBSITE.

In case of payment for a material not available on ProjectShelve.com, the management of ProjectShelve.com has the right to keep your money until you send a topic that is available on our website within 48 hours.

You cannot change topic after receiving material of the topic you ordered and paid for.

Ratings & Reviews

0.0

No Review Found.

Review


To Comment