title: Socio-demographic determinants and access to prenatal care in Italy.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Many governments have made commitments to examine inequalities in healthcare access based on studies assessing the association between several socio-demographic factors and late initiation or fewer prenatal examinations. This study addressed the question of whether socio-demographic determinants were significant in explaining differences in prenatal care in one administrative region of Italy, Umbria.
  
  
  METHODS
  Data were obtained from the administrative source of the regional Standard Certificate of Live Births between 2005 and 2010, and were merged with Census data to include a socio-economic deprivation index. Standard and multilevel logistic regression models were used to analyze the magnitude of various individual-level maternal characteristics and socio-demographic indicators, such as nationality, employment status, education with respect to late access to the first examination, and low number of medical visits.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The study involved approximately 37,000 women. The heterogeneous effects of socio-demographic variables were documented on the prenatal care indicators analyzed. A multivariate model showed that women born outside Italy had a higher probability of making their first visit later than the 12th week of pregnancy and low numbers of prenatal medical visits; the estimated odds ratio for the analyzed indicators range from 2.25 to 3.05. Inadequate prenatal healthcare use was also observed in younger and pluriparous women and those with low education; in addition, having a job improved the use of services, possibly through transmission of information of negative consequences due to delayed or few prenatal visits. Interestingly, this study found a substantial reduction in the number of pregnant women who do not use prenatal healthcare services properly.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The aim of this research is to provide more accurate knowledge about the inadequate use of prenatal healthcare in Italy. Results highlight the existence of differences in healthcare use during pregnancy, especially for women from less advantaged social classes (i.e., unemployed or poorly educated). Such inequalities should be examined in all areas of public policy and public services, to ensure equal opportunity for their use.
authors.forename: Manuela
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Chiavarini
authors.forename: Donatella
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Lanari
authors.forename: Liliana
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Minelli
authors.affiliation: Department of Experimental Medicine, Public Health Section, University of Perugia, Perugia, Italy. luca.salmasi@progetti.unipg.it.
authors.forename: Luca
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Salmasi
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D005260:Female; D006297:Health Services Accessibility; D006301:Health Services Needs and Demand; D006302:Health Services Research; D006801:Humans; D007558:Italy; D011247:Pregnancy; D011295:Prenatal Care / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D012959:Socioeconomic Factors
references.citation: BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2011 Feb 11;11:13
references.pmid: 21314944
references.citation: Int Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2009 Mar;35(1):15-20
references.pmid: 19465344
references.citation: Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2001;(4):CD000934
references.pmid: 11687086
references.citation: J Community Health. 2012 Aug;37(4):865-73
references.pmid: 22134620
references.citation: BMC Public Health. 2010 Sep 01;10:527
references.pmid: 20809951
references.citation: Reprod Health. 2006 Aug 18;3:8
references.pmid: 16916473
references.citation: Public Health. 2008 Dec;122(12):1363-72
references.pmid: 18639909
references.citation: Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2003 Nov 28;111 Suppl 1:S5-S14
references.pmid: 14642316
references.citation: J Health Care Poor Underserved. 2007 Aug;18(3):620-36
references.pmid: 17675718
references.citation: J Public Health Med. 2003 Jun;25(2):113-9
references.pmid: 12848399
references.citation: BMC Public Health. 2010 Sep 22;10:566
references.pmid: 20858285
references.citation: Am J Prev Med. 2001 Jul;21(1):52-9
references.pmid: 11418258
references.citation: J Am Osteopath Assoc. 2000 Aug;100(8):485-92
references.pmid: 10979253
references.citation: Eur J Public Health. 2012 Dec;22(6):904-13
references.pmid: 22109988
references.citation: Public Health. 2012 Feb;126(2):112-6
references.pmid: 22136699
references.citation: Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 1992 Nov;32(4):306-8
references.pmid: 1290424
references.citation: BMC Public Health. 2010 Aug 16;10:485
references.pmid: 20712866
references.citation: Soc Work. 1999 Mar;44(2):116-28
references.pmid: 10718077
references.citation: Milbank Mem Fund Q Health Soc. 1973 Winter;51(1):95-124
references.pmid: 4198894
references.citation: JAMA. 1993 Mar 10;269(10):1285-9
references.pmid: 8437308
references.citation: BJOG. 2007 Oct;114(10):1232-9
references.pmid: 17655734
references.citation: J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2007 Oct;29(10):806-16
references.pmid: 17915064
references.citation: BJOG. 2002 Mar;109(3):265-73
references.pmid: 11950181
references.citation: Matern Child Health J. 2011 Oct;15(7):1067-75
references.pmid: 20661634
references.citation: BMC Public Health. 2007 Sep 27;7:268
references.pmid: 17900359
references.citation: Birth. 2010 Mar;37(1):37-43
references.pmid: 20402720
references.citation: Midwifery. 2009 Jun;25(3):277-85
references.pmid: 17920737
references.citation: J Adolesc Health. 1996 Aug;19(2):132-40
references.pmid: 8863085
references.citation: Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2003 Nov 28;111 Suppl 1:S15-32
references.pmid: 14642317
references.citation: J Community Health. 1991 Oct;16(5):283-95
references.pmid: 1955579
references.citation: Soc Sci Med. 2000 Jun;50(12):1797-806
references.pmid: 10798333
references.citation: Int J Public Health. 2012 Apr;57(2):261-8
references.pmid: 22009490
references.citation: J Epidemiol Community Health. 2001 Feb;55(2):111-22
references.pmid: 11154250
references.citation: BJOG. 2001 Jul;108(7):721-5
references.pmid: 11467698