<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rdf:RDF xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel rdf:about="http://localhost/xmlui/handle/123456789/6176">
<title>COHES</title>
<link>http://localhost/xmlui/handle/123456789/6176</link>
<description/>
<items>
<rdf:Seq>
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://localhost/xmlui/handle/123456789/7090"/>
</rdf:Seq>
</items>
<dc:date>2026-08-24T03:45:44Z</dc:date>
</channel>
<item rdf:about="http://localhost/xmlui/handle/123456789/7090">
<title>Predictors of Quality of Care among People with Epilepsy  Receiving Treatment at Selected Hospitals in Nairobi, Kiambu  and Machakos counties, Kenya</title>
<link>http://localhost/xmlui/handle/123456789/7090</link>
<description>Predictors of Quality of Care among People with Epilepsy  Receiving Treatment at Selected Hospitals in Nairobi, Kiambu  and Machakos counties, Kenya
Nyakwana, Tiberry D. O.
Epilepsy is a common neurological disorder affecting over 70 million people globally &#13;
and accounting for approximately 1% of the global disease burden, with nearly 90% &#13;
of cases occurring in low- and middle-income countries. In sub-Saharan Africa, an &#13;
estimated 10 million people live with epilepsy, while Kenya has a prevalence of about &#13;
18 per 1,000 population, corresponding to nearly one million people with epilepsy &#13;
(PWE), of whom approximately 80% do not receive adequate treatment. Beyond its &#13;
clinical burden, epilepsy is associated with stigma, discrimination, reduced &#13;
productivity, and increased healthcare utilization. Despite increasing awareness and &#13;
improved health-seeking behaviour, evidence on the quality of epilepsy care and its &#13;
determinants in Kenya remains limited. The main objective of this study was to &#13;
determine predictors of quality of care among PWE receiving treatment at selected &#13;
Level Five hospitals in Nairobi, Kiambu, and Machakos counties. A cross-sectional &#13;
mixed-methods study was conducted between May and September 2021. Quantitative &#13;
data were collected from 373 PWE using semi-structured questionnaires, while &#13;
qualitative data were obtained through focus group discussions and key informant &#13;
interviews. The Donabedian Structure–Process–Outcome Framework and the Aday &#13;
and Andersen Healthcare Utilization Model guided the assessment of quality domains &#13;
and determinants. Quality of care was measured using a semantic differential scale, &#13;
and Exploratory Factor Analysis generated normalized factor weights that were used &#13;
to construct a composite weighted quality index. A median score of 47 was used to &#13;
categorize quality of care into high and low levels. Although Fisher’s finite population &#13;
correction yielded a minimum sample size of 276 from a sampling frame of 969 &#13;
patients, the study retained the original Fisher sample size of 385 to enhance statistical &#13;
power, reduce sampling error, and improve precision. Consecutive sampling recruited &#13;
373 participants, representing a 96.9% response rate. Quantitative data were analyzed &#13;
using descriptive statistics, chi-square tests, logistic regression, and multiple linear &#13;
regression in SPSS version 26, while qualitative data were analyzed thematically in &#13;
NVivo and triangulated with quantitative findings. Majority participants were 29–49 &#13;
years (37.5%), and 52.8% reported receiving high-quality care. Respect, &#13;
communication, and tolerability of medication side effects were the most important &#13;
contributors to quality ratings. At bivariate analysis, occupation (χ²=19.13, p&lt;0.001), &#13;
duration before treatment initiation (χ²=6.07, p=0.048), anti-seizure medication use &#13;
(χ²=4.024, p=0.045), seizure frequency after treatment initiation (χ²=7.337, p=0.026), &#13;
stigma experience (χ²=5.022, p=0.025), treatment regimen (χ²=10.464, p=0.015), &#13;
waiting time (χ²=6.49, p=0.031), service availability (χ²=7.137, p=0.029), and &#13;
affordability of care (χ²=4.034, p=0.043) were significantly associated with quality of &#13;
care. Multivariate logistic regression identified stigma as the strongest independent &#13;
predictor of low-quality care (OR=2.123, 95% CI: 1.119–4.026; p=0.021). Qualitative &#13;
findings showed that respectful provider interactions, effective communication, and &#13;
treatment effectiveness enhanced patient experiences, whereas inadequate education &#13;
regarding seizure management and medication side effects reduced perceived quality. &#13;
The study concludes that quality of epilepsy care is shaped by a complex interplay of &#13;
sociodemographic, clinical, psychosocial, and health system factors, with stigma &#13;
emerging as the most pervasive determinant. Strengthening community sensitization, &#13;
healthcare worker training, patient education, diagnostic capacity, medication supply &#13;
systems, and structured counselling and peer-support programmes is essential for &#13;
xxi &#13;
improving quality of care, narrowing the treatment gap, and informing county and &#13;
national epilepsy policies.
PhD in Public Health
</description>
<dc:date>2026-08-07T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
</item>
</rdf:RDF>
