4.6 Article

Mother's knowledge on prevention of mother-to-child transmission of HIV, Ethiopia: A cross sectional study

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 13, 期 9, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0203043

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective To identify proportion of and factors for comprehensive knowledge on prevention of mother-to-child transmission of HIV in pregnant women attending antenatal care in Northern Ethiopia. Methods A total of 416 pregnant women were interviewed between October 2012 and May 2013. Logistic regression analysis was used to identify factors for comprehensive knowledge on prevention of mother-to-child transmission of HIV. Results The proportion of pregnant women, who have comprehensive knowledge on prevention of mother-to-child transmission of HIV, was 52%. The odds of having comprehensive knowledge on prevention of mother-to-child transmission of HIV were higher among pregnant women who were younger (16 to 24 years old) (Adjusted Odds Ratio (AOR) = 2.95; 95%Cl: 1.20, 7.26), urban residents (AOR = 2.45; 95%CI: 1.39, 4.32), attending secondary education and above (AOR = 4.43; 95%CI: 2.40, 8.20), employed (AOR = 4.99;95%CI: 2.45, 10.16), have five children or more (AOR = 9.34; 95%CI:3.78, 23.07), have favored attitude towards HIV positive living (AOR = 2.53; 95%CI: 1.43, 4.44) and have perceived susceptibility to HIV (AOR = 10.72; 95%CI: 3.90, 29.39). Conclusion The proportion of women who have comprehensive knowledge on prevention of mother-to-child transmission of HIV in this study setting was low. Measures which will escalate mother's knowledge on prevention of mother-to-child transmission of HIV should be emphasized. Efforts to improve mother's knowledge on prevention of mother-to-child transmission of HIV should target women who were older age (> = 35years), rural residents, unemployed, not 16 attending formal education, primigravids, have no favored attitude towards HIV positive living and have not perceived susceptibility to HIV.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据