Background Postpartum haemorrhage is one of the direct and the leading causes of maternal morbidity and mortality. There are many risk factors of postpartum haemorrhage, which vary in different settings. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to assess postpartum haemorrhage and associated factors among mothers who gave birth in public health facilities.
Methods A cross-sectional study was employed from 17 November 2019 to 15 February 2020. The study participants were selected using a systematic sampling technique. The data were entered and cleaned using EpiData V.3.1 then exported to SPSS V.20 for analysis. Factors associated with postpartum haemorrhage were selected for multiple logistic regression at the probability value (p value) of less than 0.2 in the χ2 analysis. Statistically significant associated factors were identified at probability value (p value) less than 0.05 and adjusted OR (AOR) with a 95% CI.
Results The mean age of participants was 31.3 (SD ±5.7) years. This study found that the prevalence of postpartum haemorrhage was 13.6% (67). Age of participants (AOR 12.5, 95% CI 4.0 to 38.6), disrespectful maternity care (AOR 8.4, 95% CI 3.2 to 22.0), labour induction and augmentation (AOR 6.97, 95% CI 2.34 to 20.8), the prolonged second stage of labour (AOR 9.9, 95% CI 2.6 to 37.1) and no antenatal care visit (AOR 10.1, 95% CI 3.4 to 29.7) were statistically significant associated factors of postpartum haemorrhage.
Conclusions The prevalence of postpartum haemorrhage is high. The age of the participants, disrespectful maternity care, labour induction and augmentation, the prolonged second stage of labour and no antenatal care visit were independent predictors of postpartum haemorrhage.
- organisation of health services
- maternal medicine
- public health
Data availability statement
Data are available on reasonable request. The datasets used and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Contributors AHD and SBZ contributed to the design of the study, conceptualisation, validation, visualisation and methodology, the process of analysis and interpretation of finding, original draft and revising the manuscript. All authors read and approved the manuscript.
Funding This study was funded by Debre Tabor University.
Disclaimer The funder is not listed in the fund Ref Registry and there is no award number/ grant number.
Competing interests None declared.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.