Inequalities in caesarean section in Burundi: evidence from the Burundi Demographic and Health Surveys (2010-2016).
Burundi
Caesarean section
DHS
Global health
Inequality
Journal
BMC health services research
ISSN: 1472-6963
Titre abrégé: BMC Health Serv Res
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101088677
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
14 Jul 2020
14 Jul 2020
Historique:
received:
14
05
2020
accepted:
07
07
2020
entrez:
16
7
2020
pubmed:
16
7
2020
medline:
17
12
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Despite caesarean section (CS) being a lifesaving intervention, there is a noticeable gap in providing this service, when necessary, between different population groups within a country. In Burundi, there is little information about CS coverage inequality and the change in provision of this service over time. Using a high-quality equity analysis approach, we aimed to document both magnitude and change of inequality in CS coverage in Burundi over 7 years to investigate disparities. For this study, data were extracted from the 2010 and 2016 Burundi Demographic and Health Surveys (BDHS) and analyzed through the recently updated Health Equity Assessment Toolkit (HEAT) of the World Health Organization. CS delivery was disaggregated by four equity stratifiers, namely education, wealth, residence and sub-national region. For each equity stratifier, relative and absolute summary measures were calculated. We built a 95% uncertainty interval around the point estimate to determine statistical significance. Disparity in CS was present in both survey years and increased over time. The disparity systematically favored wealthy women (SII = 10.53, 95% UI; 8.97, 12.10), women who were more educated (PAR = 8.89, 95% UI; 8.51, 9.26), women living in urban areas (D = 12.32, 95% UI; 9.00, 15.63) and some regions such as Bujumbura (PAR = 11.27, 95% UI; 10.52, 12.02). Burundi had not recorded any progress in ensuring equity regarding CS coverage between 2010 and 2016. It is important to launch interventions that promote justified use of CS among all subpopulations and discourage overuse among high income, more educated women and urban dwellers.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Despite caesarean section (CS) being a lifesaving intervention, there is a noticeable gap in providing this service, when necessary, between different population groups within a country. In Burundi, there is little information about CS coverage inequality and the change in provision of this service over time. Using a high-quality equity analysis approach, we aimed to document both magnitude and change of inequality in CS coverage in Burundi over 7 years to investigate disparities.
METHODS
METHODS
For this study, data were extracted from the 2010 and 2016 Burundi Demographic and Health Surveys (BDHS) and analyzed through the recently updated Health Equity Assessment Toolkit (HEAT) of the World Health Organization. CS delivery was disaggregated by four equity stratifiers, namely education, wealth, residence and sub-national region. For each equity stratifier, relative and absolute summary measures were calculated. We built a 95% uncertainty interval around the point estimate to determine statistical significance.
MAIN FINDINGS
RESULTS
Disparity in CS was present in both survey years and increased over time. The disparity systematically favored wealthy women (SII = 10.53, 95% UI; 8.97, 12.10), women who were more educated (PAR = 8.89, 95% UI; 8.51, 9.26), women living in urban areas (D = 12.32, 95% UI; 9.00, 15.63) and some regions such as Bujumbura (PAR = 11.27, 95% UI; 10.52, 12.02).
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Burundi had not recorded any progress in ensuring equity regarding CS coverage between 2010 and 2016. It is important to launch interventions that promote justified use of CS among all subpopulations and discourage overuse among high income, more educated women and urban dwellers.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32664936
doi: 10.1186/s12913-020-05516-8
pii: 10.1186/s12913-020-05516-8
pmc: PMC7359587
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
652Références
Lancet. 2018 Oct 13;392(10155):1341-1348
pubmed: 30322584
Lancet. 1985 Aug 24;2(8452):436-7
pubmed: 2863457
Lancet. 2018 Oct 13;392(10155):1358-1368
pubmed: 30322586
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2016 Oct 19;16(1):141
pubmed: 27760520
BMJ. 2018 Jan 24;360:k55
pubmed: 29367432
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2010 Jan;202(1):65.e1-6
pubmed: 19819416
Reprod Health. 2015 Jun 21;12:57
pubmed: 26093498
Bull World Health Organ. 2013 Dec 1;91(12):914-922D
pubmed: 24347730
Glob Health Res Policy. 2018 Jul 2;3:19
pubmed: 29988650
Lancet. 2010 Feb 6;375(9713):490-9
pubmed: 20071021
Public Health Action. 2016 Jun 21;6(2):72-6
pubmed: 27358799
Lancet. 2018 Oct 13;392(10155):1349-1357
pubmed: 30322585
PLoS One. 2012;7(9):e44484
pubmed: 22962616
Lancet. 2000 Oct 21;356(9239):1375-83
pubmed: 11052579
Int J Equity Health. 2012 Aug 29;11:49
pubmed: 22931249
Reprod Health. 2014;11(1):14
pubmed: 24563907
Int J Surg. 2014 Dec;12(12):1495-9
pubmed: 25046131
Lancet. 2006 Oct 28;368(9546):1516-23
pubmed: 17071285