Distance as a barrier to obstetric care among indigenous women in Panama: a cross-sectional study.
Abortion, Spontaneous
/ epidemiology
Adult
Cross-Sectional Studies
Female
Health Services Accessibility
/ statistics & numerical data
Humans
Indigenous Peoples
/ statistics & numerical data
Panama
/ epidemiology
Postnatal Care
/ statistics & numerical data
Poverty Areas
Pregnancy
Prenatal Care
/ statistics & numerical data
Stillbirth
/ epidemiology
health economics
international health services
tropical medicine
Journal
BMJ open
ISSN: 2044-6055
Titre abrégé: BMJ Open
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101552874
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
04 03 2020
04 03 2020
Historique:
entrez:
7
3
2020
pubmed:
7
3
2020
medline:
13
2
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
We assess the relationship between distance to a woman's assigned health clinic and obstetric care utilisation. We employ a cross-sectional study design using baseline data from the evaluation of a conditional cash transfer programme to promote greater utilisation of maternal and infant health services. Data were collected between December 2016 and January 2017. The study is conducted in Ngäbe Buglé, the largest of Panama's three indigenous territories, where maternal mortality is three times the national average. We analyse a representative sample of 1336 indigenous women with a birth in the 12 months prior to the survey. Primary outcomes include obstetric care utilisation measures for prenatal, childbirth and postpartum events. Secondary outcomes include reasons for not receiving prenatal care, alarming symptoms, child weight at birth and stillbirths or miscarriages. Compared with women in closest geographic proximity to a health centre (top quintile, Q1), women who lived farthest from a health centre (bottom quintile, Q5) had significantly lower obstetric care utilisation outcomes for critical prenatal, childbirth and postpartum events. Mothers in Q5 were 36 percentage points less likely to have had at least one prenatal care appointment in a hospital, health centre or clinic compared with mothers in Q1 (p<0.01), and 52 percentage points less likely to attend an institutional first appointment (p<0.01). The gap in institutional delivery and postnatal care between mothers in Q1 and Q5 was about 35 percentage points (p<0.01). All utilisation outcomes were negatively correlated with distance, and differences in obstetric care utilisation persisted even when controlling for household wealth, maternal age and maternal education. Distance is an important barrier to obstetric care utilisation, with women in more distant locations suffering significantly lower use of prenatal, childbirth and postpartum care compared with women in closer vicinity to a health establishment. Expanding the supply of healthcare and implementing demand side incentives to promote the use of health services in remote communities are relevant policies to reduce disparities in obstetric care utilisation. AEA Registry (RCT ID AEARCTR-0001751).
Identifiants
pubmed: 32139491
pii: bmjopen-2019-034763
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-034763
pmc: PMC7059489
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e034763Informations de copyright
© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Competing interests: None declared.
Références
Int J Epidemiol. 1986 Sep;15(3):404-7
pubmed: 3771079
Acta Trop. 2004 Aug;91(3):227-37
pubmed: 15246929
BMJ Open. 2016 Nov 24;6(11):e013059
pubmed: 27884848
Soc Sci Med. 1983;17(9):563-70
pubmed: 6879255
PLoS One. 2018 Mar 19;13(3):e0194103
pubmed: 29554118
Trop Med Int Health. 2009 Jan;14(1):54-61
pubmed: 19021892
J Health Popul Nutr. 2017 Apr 4;36(1):9
pubmed: 28376916
Health Policy Plan. 2011 Jan;26(1):25-32
pubmed: 20375105
Health Policy Plan. 2017 Jul 1;32(6):769-780
pubmed: 28335004
Int J Health Plann Manage. 2003 Oct-Dec;18(4):293-311
pubmed: 14727709
Lancet. 2010 Jun 5;375(9730):2009-23
pubmed: 20569841
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2010 Aug;203(2):122.e1-6
pubmed: 20471628