SCMS SCHOOL OF TECHNOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT

Business Research Methods

RESEARCH REPORT
‘A study on public awareness of
services provided by the public
health centers in Kerala’

Submitted by,
Akhil Raj P M (fm-1921)
Arsha C P (fm-1908)
Andria Benitta Rocha (fm-1958)
Alen Augustine (fm-1952)
Ahmed Ameen (fm-1978)
Denin Joy (fm-1900)
1.1 INTRODUCTION
“It is health that is the real wealth, and not pieces of gold and silver.”
-Mahatma Gandhi
Health is considered to be very important element in life. From a nations point of view health
of individuals is given due importance as it contributes to the strength of the nation. Good
health of individuals are the prerequisite for economic development and social welfare of a
nation. A healthy community is the infrastructure upon which an economically viable society
can be build up as unhealthy people will not be able to make much contributions to the
nation’s progress.
India has a total of 17,149 health centers functioning (2017) for a population above 1.2
billion. This includes 8,801 Primary Health Centre, 6,795 Health Sub- Centre (HSC) and
1,553 Urban Primary Health Centre (UPHCs). For the past six decades Indian states have
varying level of success in healthcare. Especially Kerala, southern Indian state with about a
population of 33.3 million people is consistently coming out with much better outcomes in
health care. The health gains made in Kerala can be attributed to several factors, this includes
the strong emphasis from the state government on public health and primary health care
(PHC), health infrastructure, decentralized governance, financial planning, girls’ education,
community participation and a willingness to improve systems in response to identified gaps.
Kerala has lower infant mortality rate (12 per1000 live births), lower maternal mortality rate
(66 per 100000 live births) and highest literary rate compared to all other nations. Kerala
rapidly expanded the number of medical facilities, hospital beds, and doctors. From 1960 to
2010, the number of doctors increased from 1200 to 36,000, between 1960 and 2004 the
number of primary health care facilities from increased from 369 to 1356. Kerala was praised
for its public health programs that were to an extent very success in preventing contagious
deceases.
PHC’s in Kerala are under the control of Kerala Government Health Department. There are a
lot of services provided in the public health centers and compared to other private health care
centers PHC’s provide services at a very minimal cost which a common man could afford.
Every year in the budget of Kerala State Government a large sum of amount is being spend
for this PHC’s. In 2021 Financial Budget of the State Kerala presented by FM Thomas Isaac
has uplifted all spending restrictions to fight against the Covid-19 pandemic. Information
regarding the services provided by the PHC’s are available in the Health portals of Kerala
Government. This study is conducted to know how much the public is aware about the
different services provided by PHC.
1.2 RESEARCH METHDOLGY
Research methodology is the specific procedures or techniques used to identify, select,
process, and analyse information about a topic.

Nature of study.
This study is analytical in nature.

Population
The population for the study is taken as people in Kerala

Sample
The Sample for the study is taken from 105 Keralite belonging to different age groups.
Convenience sampling method will be adopted for this study.

Method of data collection

The data for the study will be collected through a well-structured questionnaire and along
with the primary data we also depend on secondary data such as government portals, google
scholar, newspapers and magazines for data collection.

Tools for Analysis

The tools used for analysis are pie charts, ANOVA, regression, correlation.

1.3ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

Frequency Analysis
This analysis is done to determine the percentage of males and females from the respondents.
The table below shows the details of frequency analysis on gender
Gender
Frequency Percent Valid Cumulative
Percent Percent
male 48 45.7 45.7 45.7
Valid female 57 54.3 54.3 100.0
Total 105 100.0 100.0
From 105 respondents we have more of female respondents with 54.3% and male
respondents with 45.7%
 To check the significance between gender and their regularity in visiting PHC

The survey conducted of 106 Respondents. The frequency was done to determine the
percentage of male and female among the respondents. From the chart, it is seen that there 48
males comprise of 45.71% and 57 females to 54.29%.

ANOVA
Are you a regular user of Public Health Center services?
Sum of df Mean Square F Sig.
Squares
Between
1.730 1 1.730 1.837 .178
Groups
Within Groups 97.032 103 .942
Total 98.762 104

The significance level is the probability of rejecting the null hypothesis when it is true. For
example, a significance level of 0.05 indicates a 5% risk of concluding that a difference exists
when there is no actual difference. From the above test conducted the level of significance is
greater than 0.05 hence we Accept hypothesis that there is a significance influence on the
regularity in visiting PHC based on gender.

Annual Income
Frequency Percent Valid Cumulative
Percent Percent
Below 1
52 49.5 49.5 49.5
lakh
Valid 1lakh-3 lakh 36 34.3 34.3 83.8
above 3 lakh 17 16.2 16.2 100.0
Total 105 100.0 100.0

From the above analysis of annual income, it is estimated that, the category of people who
have an above 3 lakh annual income is rarely visiting the government PHCs and the people
below 1 lakh depends mostly on PHC’s. The category of people between 1-3 lakh depends on
both private and public PHCs.

Chart showing the percentage of frequency of availing PHC services.

Out of the 105 respondents 45 respondents use to avail PHC services some-times 24 where
rarely users 23 of the respondents where often users and 5 of the responders have never used
the PHC service. A descriptive analysis was done in order to know if there is a relation
between the income and the usage of PHC. To check the significance between Annual
Income and regularity use of PHC

ANOVA
Are you a regular user of Public Health Centre services?
Sum of df Mean Square F Sig.
Squares
Between
2.574 2 1.287 1.365 .260
Groups
Within Groups 96.188 102 .943
Total 98.762 104
From this we could analysis that as the level of significance is greater than 0.05 so we Accept
hypothesis that there is significance between Annual Income and regularity use of PHC
From the study we can understand that there is a significant relationship between the income
and frequency of use of PHC services. Low-income group uses the PHC services more.
 To check the significance between counselling and regularity of visiting PHC

ANOVA
Model Sum of df Mean Square F Sig.
Squares
Regression 19.775 1 19.775 25.786 .000b
1 Residual 78.987 103 .767
Total 98.762 104

To check the significance between facility provided PHC and the regularity in visiting PHC

ANOVA
Model Sum of df Mean Square F Sig.
Squares
Regression 3.946 1 3.946 4.287 .041b
1 Residual 94.816 103 .921
Total 98.762 104

The level of significance is less than 0.05 so we Reject the hypothesis that there
is a significance between facility provided PHC and the regularity in visiting
PHC
Most of the people never depend on PHCs as their regular visit. It’s depend on
the purpose they choose to go there.

To check significance between satisfaction of services and regularity in visiting PHC

ANOVA
Model Sum of df Mean Square F Sig.
Squares
Regression 2.356 1 2.356 2.518 .116b
1 Residual 96.405 103 .936
Total 98.762 104

As the level of significance level is greater than 0.05, we accept the hypothesis that there is a
significance between satisfaction of services and regularity in visiting PHC
Most people agreed that they are satisfied with their PHCs services but the second category
of people are not much into it and the other categories actually disagrees with their services

FINDINGS
 Strong primary health care can improve population health outcomes and health system
responsiveness
 Strong primary health care can improve the equity of health systems
 It is noted that the people who belong to below 1 lakh as their annual income depends
more on public health centres.
 The infrastructure, hygiene, services effects the demand of PHCs.
 Strong primary health care can reduce unnecessary use of more expensive health care
resources and improve health system efficiency
 Income earned by people influences the Regularity of people visiting PHC

SUGGESTIONS
 There could be WhatsApp group created to get information about new schemes in PHC
 New website or apps that give information about new schemes
 PHC should maintain medical records of patience when they come for further check-ups
 Booking facilities would help people to book prior and not wait for long.

CONCLUSION

The concept of health as curing the bodily ailments and control of population growth is the
principle guiding the present primary health care system in the area. This approach keeps
away many issues of health in the local area - both positive and negative aspects-for
consideration as health activities. The fact that local planners, medical professionals and other
health care providers are holding this approach make them fail to comprehend the sufferings
happening in the area. The existing primary health care practice can seldom accomplish well-
being of all people in the area. A detailed plan of the idea of people’s health praxis in which
people themselves recognise their central role in local health system has to be worked out.
For this, fundamental issues giving rise to suffering in human interactions have to be
understood by each agent involved in the interactions giving rise to health system or any
social system. As a beginning some fifty people including both formal health care providers
and health activists should be trained in people’s health praxis for preparing a detailed plan of
action. Five members from each neighbourhood group should also be equipped for people’s
health praxis. This should result in a local health system in which each human agent is aware
of the genesis, reproduction and conditions of overcoming suffering taking place in the area.
Because of its high health indices under economic backwardness, Kerala has generated
tremendous focus worldwide. However, new challenges face the state of Kerala, namely
sustaining the achievements that they have made given the current economic climate. Kerala
is eagerly struggling to pave a new way without resting on the past laurels. The World Health
Organization published a report, Macroeconomics and Health, in 2001, stressing that health
was not merely consuming goods, but an investment for economic growth.

REFERENCES
1. Banerji .D. Poverty Class and Health Culture Vol. I : New Delhi, Prachi Prakasan, (1982)
2. Christiansen T, Kooiker S. “Inequalities in health : Evidences from Denmark of the
interactions of circumstances and health related behaviour” . Scand.J.Public health 1999 Sept
27(3) 181-8, (1999)
3. Fredric D. Wolinsky. “Age, period and cohort analysis of health-related behaviours”. in
(Ed.)Population Health Research - Linking Theory and Methods, ed. Kathryn Dean London,
Sage Publications Ltd, (1993)
4. Frits Muller. ‘ Primary Health Care: Lessons from 25 years of experiences in developing
countries’ in (Ed.) Health Matters - Public Health in North South perspective, ed. Koos Van
Der Velden, Amsterdam, Royal Tropical Institute (1995)
5. Gopalan H N B and Sumeet Saksena (Eds). Domestic Environment and Health of Women
and Children: New Delhi, TERI, UNEP, (1999)
6. Government of India. Draft National Health Policy 2001.New Delhi, Ministry of Health
and Family Welfare, Govt. of India (2001)
7. Government of Kerala. A Handbook on Primary Health Centre Management.Third India
Population Project Kerala. (1987)
8. Imrana Qadeer. ‘The World Development Report 1993: The brave new world of Primary
HealthCare in (Ed.) Disinvesting in Health, ed. Mohan Rao.New Delhi , Sage (1989)
9. Kannan K.P. etal. Health and Development in Rural Kerala. Kozhikode: Kerala Sastra
Sahitya Parishath, (1991)
10. Koos Van Der Velden in Health Matters - Public Health in North South perspective, ed.
Koos Van Der Velden, Amsterdam, Royal Tropical Institute (1995)
11. S.B.Kar & E, Berkanovic. “Indicators of Behaviour conducive to health promotion” in
Measurement in health promotion and protection, ed. T.Abelin et.al : WHO Regional
Publications, European Series No. 22, (1987)
12. Marshall Marinker, ‘ Primary Health Care as a concept and an organisational structure’in
Medical Education and primary health care, Horst Noack, ed. London, Croom Helm (1998)
13. Mohan Rao (Eds). Disinvesting in Health. New Delhi : Sage Publications, (1999)
14. Naock .H. “Concepts of health and health promotion” in Measurement in health
promotion and protection,ed. T.Abelin et.al : WHO Regional Publications, European Series
No. 22,(1987)
15. National Family Health, Survey (NFHS) Kerala - 1992-93. Population Research Centre
University of Kerala and International Institute for Population Sciences, Bombay, (1995).
16. Nizar Ahamed. Methodological Significance of justice in identifying the socio-cultural
constraints on health.. Kozhikode : Prayoga Trust unpublished document, (1996).
17. Nizar Ahamed. On Health Ethics. Kozhikode : Institute for Social and Ecological Studies
unpublished document (2003)
18. P.G.K. Panicker. Health Transition in Kerala. KRPLLD, Discussion Paper No.10, (1999)
19.Government of Kerala. (2002). “Economic Review”. State Planning board
Thiruvananthapuram and Health Information Cell. Directorate of Health Service
Thiruvananthapuram.
20.Anita, N.H. (1996). “The social Path to Kerala’s Health”. International Conference on
Kerala’s Development Experience. India. International Center New Delhi Dec: 8-1 1: p. 72.
21.Kabir, M. and Krishnan, T.N. (1992). “Health and Development in India Social
[intermediation and Health Transition. Lessons from Kerala Jan;2-4. Centre for Population
and Development Studies.
22.Kannan, K.P., Thankappan, K.R., Raman Kutty, V. and Aravindan, K.P.(1991). “Health
and Development in Rural Kerala: A Study of the Linkages between Socio— Economic
Status and Health Statu"s. Integrated Rural Technology Center of The Kerala Sastra Sahitya
Parishad.
23.Panikar, P.G.K. (1975). “Fertility Decline in Kerala. Social JusticeHypothesis”. Economic
and Political Weekly. Vol IX. No.13.