Despite Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) being the epicenter of the HIV epidemic, uptake of HIV testing is not optimal. While qualitative studies have been undertaken to investigate factors influencing uptake of HIV testing, systematic reviews to provide a more comprehensive understanding are lacking.

Objectives. In Switzerland, the Baby-Friendly Hospital Initiative (BFHI) proposed by the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) was introduced in 1993 to promote breastfeeding nationwide. This study reports results of a national study of the prevalence and duration of breastfeeding in 2003 throughout Switzerland and analyzes the influence of compliance with UNICEF guidelines of the hospital where delivery took place on breastfeeding duration. Methods. Between April and September 2003, a random sample of mothers who had given birth in the past 9 months in Switzerland received a questionnaire on breastfeeding and complementary feeding. Seventy-four percent of the contacted mothers (n = 3032) participated; they completed a 24-hour dietary recall questionnaire and reported the age at first introduction of various foods and drinks. After excluding questionnaires with missing information relevant for the analyses, we analyzed data for 2861 infants 0 to 11 months of age, born in 145 different health facilities. Because it was known whether each child was born in a designated baby-friendly hospital (45 hospitals) or in a health facility in the process of being evaluated for BFHI inclusion (31 facilities), we were able to assess a possible influence of the BFHI on breastfeeding success. For this purpose, we merged individual data with hospital data on compliance with the UNICEF guidelines, from a data source collected on an annual basis for quality monitoring of designated baby-friendly hospitals and health facilities in the evaluation process. Information on actual compliance with the guidelines allowed us to investigate the relationship between breastfeeding outcomes and compliance with UNICEF guidelines. We were also able to compare the breastfeeding results with those for non–baby-friendly health facilities. The comparison was based on median durations of exclusive, full, and any breastfeeding calculated for each group. To allow for other known influencing factors, we calculated adjusted hazard ratios by using Cox regression; we also conducted logistic regression analyses with the 24-hour dietary recall data, to calculate adjusted odds ratios for validation of results from the retrospectively collected data. Results. In 2003, the median duration of any breastfeeding was 31 weeks at the national level, compared with 22 weeks in 1994, and the median duration of full breastfeeding was 17 weeks, compared with 15 weeks in 1994. The proportion of exclusively breastfed infants 0 to 5 months of age was 42% for infants born in baby-friendly hospitals, compared with 34% for infants born elsewhere. Breastfeeding duration for infants born in baby-friendly hospitals, compared with infants born in other hospitals, was longer if the hospital showed good compliance with the UNICEF guidelines (35 weeks vs 29 weeks for any breastfeeding, 20 weeks vs 17 weeks for full breastfeeding, and 12 weeks vs 6 weeks for exclusive breastfeeding). To control for differences in the study population between the different types of health facilities, hazard and odds ratios were calculated as described above, taking into account socioeconomic and medical factors. Although the analysis of the retrospective data showed clearly that the duration of exclusive and full breastfeeding was significantly longer if delivery occurred in a baby-friendly hospital with high compliance with the UNICEF guidelines, whereas this effect was less prominent in other baby-friendly health facilities, this difference was less obvious in the 24-hour recall data. Only for the duration of any breastfeeding could a positive effect be seen if delivery occurred in a baby-friendly hospital with high compliance with the UNICEF guidelines. Known factors involved in the evaluation of baby-friendly hospitals showed the expected influence, on the individual level, on duration of exclusive, full, and any breastfeeding. If a child had been exclusively breastfed in the hospital, the median duration of exclusive, full, and any breastfeeding was considerably longer than the mean for the entire population or for those who had received water-based liquids or supplements in the hospital. A positive effect on breastfeeding duration could be shown for full rooming in, first suckling within 1 hour, breastfeeding on demand, and also the much-debated practice of pacifier use. After controlling for medical problems before, during, and after delivery, type of delivery, well-being of the mother, maternal smoking, maternal BMI, nationality, education, work, and income, all of the factors were still significantly associated with the duration of full, exclusive, or any breastfeeding. Conclusions. Our results support the hypothesis that the general increase in breastfeeding in Switzerland since 1994 can be interpreted in part as a consequence of an increasing number of baby-friendly health facilities, whose clients breastfeed longer. Nevertheless, several alternative explanations for the longer breastfeeding duration for deliveries that occurred in baby-friendly hospitals can be discussed. In Switzerland, baby-friendly hospitals actively use their certification by UNICEF as a promotional asset. It is thus possible that differences in breastfeeding duration are attributable to the fact that mothers who intend to breastfeed longer would choose to give birth in a baby-friendly hospital and these mothers would be more willing to comply with the recommendations of the UNICEF guidelines. Even if this were the case, however, this selection bias would not explain the differences in breastfeeding duration between designated baby-friendly health facilities with higher compliance with the UNICEF guidelines and those with lower compliance. Especially this last point strongly supports a beneficial effect of the BFHI, because mothers do not know how well hospitals comply with the UNICEF program. The fact that breastfeeding rates have generally improved even in non–baby-friendly...

Using meta-ethnographic methods, we conducted a systematic review of qualitative research to understand gender-related reasons at individual, family, community and health facility levels why millions of children in low and middle income countries are still not reached by routine vaccination programmes. A systematic search of Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, ERIC, Anthropological Lit, CSA databases, IBSS, ISI Web of Knowledge, JSTOR, Soc Index and Sociological Abstracts was conducted. Key words were built around the themes of immunization, vaccines, health services, health behaviour, and developing countries. Only papers, which reported on in-depth qualitative data, were retained. Twenty-five qualitative studies, which investigated barriers to routine immunisation, were included in the review. These studies were conducted between 1982 and 2012; eighteen were published after 2000. The studies represent a wide range of low- to middle income countries including some that have well known coverage challenges. We found that women's low social status manifests on every level as a barrier to accessing vaccinations: access to education, income, as well as autonomous decision-making about time and resource allocation were evident barriers. Indirectly, women's lower status made them vulnerable to blame and shame in case of childhood illness, partly reinforcing access problems, but partly increasing women's motivation to use every means to keep their children healthy. Yet in settings where gender discrimination exists most strongly, increasing availability and information may not be enough to reach the under immunised. Programmes must actively be designed to include mitigation measures to facilitate women's access to immunisation services if we hope to improve immunisation coverage. Gender inequality needs to be addressed on structural, community and household levels if the number of unvaccinated children is to substantially decrease.

Background: The role of socio-cultural factors in influencing access to HIV/AIDS treatment, care and support is increasingly recognized by researchers, international donors and policy makers. Although many of them have been identified through qualitative studies, the evidence gathered by quantitative studies has not been systematically analysed. To fill this knowledge gap, we did a systematic review of quantitative studies comparing surveys done in high and low income countries to assess the extent to which socio-cultural determinants of access, identified through qualitative studies, have been addressed in epidemiological survey studies. Methods: Ten electronic databases were searched (Cinahl, EMBASE, ISI Web of Science, IBSS, JSTOR, MedLine, Psyinfo, Psyindex and Cochrane). Two independent reviewers selected eligible publications based on the inclusion/exclusion criteria. Meta-analysis was used to synthesize data comparing studies between low and high income countries. Results: Thirty-four studies were included in the final review, 21 (62%) done in high income countries and 13 (38%) in low income countries. In low income settings, epidemiological research on access to HIV/AIDS services focused on socio-economic and health system factors while in high income countries the focus was on medical and psychosocial factors. These differences depict the perceived different barriers in the two regions. Common factors between the two regions were also found to affect HIV testing, including stigma, high risk sexual behaviours such as multiple sexual partners and not using condoms, and alcohol abuse. On the other hand, having experienced previous illness or other health conditions and good family communication was associated with adherence to ART uptake. Due to insufficient consistent data, a meta-analysis was only possible on adherence to treatment. Conclusions: This review offers evidence of the current challenges for interdisciplinary work in epidemiology and public health. Quantitative studies did not systematically address in their surveys important factors identified in qualitative studies as playing a critical role on the access to HIV/AIDS services. The evidences suggest that the problem lies in the exclusion of the qualitative information during the questionnaire design. With the changing face of the epidemic, we need a new and improved research strategy that integrates the results of qualitative studies into quantitative surveys.