Dataset Information

Ethnic group inequalities in coverage with reproductive, maternal and child health interventions: cross-sectional analyses of national surveys in 16 Latin American and Caribbean countries.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Latin American and Caribbean populations include three main ethnic groups: indigenous people, people of African descent, and people of European descent. We investigated ethnic inequalities among these groups in population coverage with reproductive, maternal, newborn, and child health interventions.

Methods

We analysed 16 standardised, nationally representative surveys carried out from 2004 to 2015 in Latin America and the Caribbean that provided information on ethnicity or a proxy indicator (household language or skin colour) and on coverage of reproductive, maternal, newborn, and child health interventions. We selected four outcomes: coverage with modern contraception, antenatal care coverage (defined as four or more antenatal visits), and skilled attendants at birth for women aged 15-49 years; and coverage with three doses of diphtheria-pertussis-tetanus (DPT3) vaccine among children aged 12-23 months. We classified women and children as indigenous, of African descent, or other ancestry (reference group) on the basis of their self-reported ethnicity or language. Mediating variables included wealth quintiles (based on household asset indices), woman's education, and urban-rural residence. We calculated crude and adjusted coverage ratios using Poisson regression.

Findings

Ethnic gaps in coverage varied substantially from country to country. In most countries, coverage with modern contraception (median coverage ratio 0·82, IQR 0·66-0·92), antenatal care (0·86, 0·75-0·94), and skilled birth attendants (0·75, 0·68-0·92) was lower among indigenous women than in the reference group. Only three countries (Nicaragua, Panama, and Paraguay) showed significant gaps in DPT3 coverage between the indigenous and the reference groups. The differences were attenuated but persisted after adjustment for wealth, education, and residence. Women and children of African descent showed similar coverage to the reference group in most countries.

Interpretation

The lower coverage levels for indigenous women are pervasive, and cannot be explained solely by differences in wealth, education, or residence. Interventions delivered at community level-such as vaccines-show less inequality than those requiring access to services, such as birth attendance. Regular monitoring of ethnic inequalities is essential to evaluate existing initiatives aimed at the inclusion of minorities and to plan effective multisectoral policies and programmes.

Funding

The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (through the Countdown to 2030 initiative) and the Wellcome Trust.

SUBMITTER: Mesenburg MA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6057134 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAlthough most Latin American and the Caribbean (LAC) countries made important progress in maternal and child health indicators from the 1990s up to 2010, little is known about such progress in the last decade. This study aims at documenting progress for each country as a whole, and to assess how within-country socioeconomic inequalities are evolving over time.MethodsWe identified LAC countries for which a national survey was available between 2011-2015 and a second comparable survey in 2018-2020. These included Argentina, Costa Rica, Cuba, the Dominican Republic, Guyana, Honduras, Peru, and Suriname. The 16 surveys included in the analysis collected nationally representative data on 221,989 women and 152,983 children using multistage sampling. Twelve health-related outcomes were studied, seven of which related to intervention coverage: the composite coverage index, demand for family planning satisfied with modern methods, antenatal care (four or more visits and eight or more visits), skilled attendant at birth, postnatal care for the mother and full immunization coverage. Five additional impact indicators were also investigated: stunting prevalence among under-five children, tobacco use by women, adolescent fertility rate, and under-five and neonatal mortality rates. For each of these indicators, average annual relative change rates were calculated between the baseline and endline national level estimates, and changes in socioeconomic inequalities over time were assessed using the slope index of inequality.ResultsProgress over time and the magnitude of inequalities varied according to country and indicator. For countries and indicators where baseline levels were high, as Argentina, Costa Rica and Cuba, progress was slow and inequalities small for most indicators. Countries that still have room for improvements, such as Guyana, Honduras, Peru and Suriname, showed faster progress for some but not all indicators, although also had wider inequalities. Among the countries studied, Peru was the top performer in terms of increasing coverage and reducing inequalities over time, followed by Honduras. Declines in family planning and immunization coverage were observed in some countries, and the widest inequalities were present for adolescent fertility and antenatal care coverage with eight or more visits.ConclusionsAlthough LAC countries are well placed in terms of current levels of health indicators compared to most low- and middle-income countries, important inequalities remain, and reversals are being observed in some areas. More targeted efforts and actions are needed in order to leave no one behind. Monitoring progress with an equity lens is essential, but this will require further investment in conducting surveys routinely.

Project description:BackgroundAnalysis of health inequalities by ethnicity is critical to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals. In Ecuador, similar to other Latin American countries, indigenous and afro-descendant populations have long been subject to racism, discrimination, and inequitable treatment. Although in recent years, Ecuador has made progress in health indicators, particularly those related to the coverage of Reproductive, Maternal, Neonatal and Child Health (RMNCH) interventions, little is known as to whether inequalities by ethnicity persist.MethodsAnalysis was based on two nationally representative health surveys (2004 and 2012). Ethnicity was self-reported and classified into three categories (Indigenous/Afro-Ecuadorian/Mixed ancestry). Coverage data for six RMNCH health interventions were stratified for each ethnic group by level of education, area of residence and wealth quintiles. Absolute inequality measures were computed and multivariate analysis using Poisson regression was undertaken.FindingsIn 2012, 74.4% of women self-identifying as indigenous did not achieve the secondary level of education and 50.7% were in the poorest quintile (Q1); this profile was relatively unchanged since 2004. From 2004 to 2012, the coverage of RMNCH interventions increased for all ethnic groups, and absolute inequality decreased. However, in 2012, regardless of education level, area of residence and wealth quintiles, ethnic inequalities remained for almost all RMNCH interventions. Indigenous women had 24% lower prevalence of modern contraceptive use (Prevalence ratio [PR] = 0.76; 95% IC: 0.7-0.8); 28% lower prevalence of antenatal care (PR = 0.72; 95% IC: 0.6-0.8); and 35% lower prevalence of skilled birth attendance and institutional delivery (PR = 0.65; 95% IC: 0.6-0.7 and PR = 0.65; 95% IC: 0.6-0.7 respectively), compared with the majority ethnic group in the country.InterpretationWhile the gaps have narrowed, indigenous people in Ecuador continue in a situation of structural racism and are left behind in terms of access to RMNCH interventions. Strategies to reduce ethnic inequalities in the coverage services need to be collaboratively redesigned/co-designed.FundingThis paper was made possible with funds from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation [Grant Number: INV-007,594/OPP1148933].

Project description:ImportancePrevious work has underscored subnational inequalities that could impede additional health gains in Kenya.ObjectiveTo provide a comprehensive assessment of the burden, distribution, and change in inequalities in reproductive, maternal, newborn, child, and adolescent health (RMNCAH) interventions in Kenya from 2003 to 2014.Design, setting, and participantsThis population-based cross-sectional study used data from the 2003, 2008, and 2014 Kenya Demographic and Health Surveys. The study included women of reproductive age (ages 15-49 years) and children younger than years, with national, regional, county, and subcounty level representation. Data analysis was conducted from April 2018 to November 2018.ExposuresSocioeconomic position that was derived from asset indices and presented as wealth quintiles. Urban and rural residence and regions of Kenya were also considered.Main outcomes and measuresAbsolute and relative measures of inequality in coverage of RMNCAH interventions.ResultsFor this analysis, representative samples of 31 380 women of reproductive age and 29 743 children younger than 5 years from across Kenya were included. The RMNCAH interventions examined demonstrated pro-rich and bottom inequality patterns. The most inequitable interventions were skilled birth attendance, family planning needs satisfied, and 4 or more antenatal care visits, whereby the absolute difference in coverage between the wealthiest (quintile 5) and poorest quintiles (quintile 1) was 61.6% (95% CI, 60.1%-63.1%), 33.4% (95% CI, 31.9%-34.9%), and 31.0% (95% CI, 30.5%-31.6%), respectively. The most equitable intervention was early initiation of breastfeeding, with an absolute difference (quintile 5 minus quintile 1) of -7.9% (95% CI, -11.1% to -4.8%), although antenatal care (1 visit) and diphtheria-tetanus-pertussis immunization (3 doses) demonstrated the best combination of high coverage and low inequalities. Our geospatial analysis revealed significant socioeconomic disparities in the northern and eastern regions of Kenya that have translated to suboptimal intervention coverage. A significant gap remains for rural, disadvantaged populations.Conclusions and relevanceCoverage of RMNCAH interventions has improved over time, but wealth and geospatial inequalities in Kenya are persistent. Policy and programming efforts should place more emphasis on improving the accessibility of health facility-based interventions, which generally demonstrate poor coverage and high inequalities, and focus on integrated approaches to maternal health service delivery at the community level when access is poor. Scaling up of health services for the urban and, in particular, rural poor areas and those residing in Kenya's former north eastern province will contribute toward achievement of universal health coverage.

Project description:BackgroundGlobal reports have described inequalities in coverage of reproductive, maternal, newborn, and child health (RMNCH) interventions, but little is known about how socioeconomic inequality in intervention coverage varies across multiple low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). We aimed to assess the association between wealth-related inequalities in coverage of RMNCH interventions.MethodsIn this cross-sectional study, we identified publicly available Demographic Health Surveys and Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys from LMICs containing information on household characteristics, reproductive health, women's and children's health, nutrition, and mortality. We identified the most recent survey from the period 2010-19 for 36 countries that contained data for our preselected set of 18 RMNCH interventions. 21 countries also had information on two common malaria interventions. We classified interventions into four groups according to their predominant delivery channels: health facility based, community based, environmental, and culturally driven (including breastfeeding practices). Within each country, we derived wealth quintiles from information on household asset indices. We studied two summary measures of within-country wealth-related inequality: absolute inequalities (akin to coverage differences among children from wealthy and poor households) using the slope index of inequality (SII), and relative inequalities (akin to the ratio of coverage levels for wealthy and poor children) using the concentration index (CIX). Pro-poor inequalities are present when intervention coverage decreased with increasing household wealth, and pro-rich inequalities are present when intervention coverage increased as household wealth increased.FindingsAcross the 36 LMICs included in our analyses, coverage of most interventions had pro-rich patterns in most countries, except for two breastfeeding indicators that mostly had higher coverage among poor women, children and households than wealthy women, children, and households. Environmental interventions were the most unequal, particularly use of clean fuels, which had median levels of SII of 48·8 (8·6-85·7) and CIX of 67·0 (45·0-85·8). Interventions primarily delivered in health facilities-namely institutional childbirth (median SII 46·7 [23·1-63·3] and CIX 11·4 [4·5-23·4]) and antenatal care (median SII 26·7 [17·0-47·2] and CIX 10·0 [4·2-17·1])-also usually had pro-rich patterns. By comparison, primarily community-based interventions, including those against malaria, were more equitably distributed-eg, oral rehydration therapy (median SII 9·4 [2·9-19·0] and CIX 3·4 [1·3-25·0]) and polio immunisation (SII 12·1 [2·3-25·0] and CIX 3·1 [0·5-7·1]). Differences across the four types of delivery channels in terms of both inequality indices were significant (SII p=0·0052; CIX p=0·0048).InterpretationInterventions that are often delivered at community level are usually more equitably distributed than those primarily delivered in fixed facilities or those that require changes in the home environment. Policy makers need to learn from community delivery channels to promote more equitable access to all RMNCH interventions.FundingBill & Melinda Gates Foundation and Wellcome Trust.TranslationsFor the French, Portuguese and Spanish translations of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Project description:BackgroundAfrodescendants are systematically affected by discrimination in the Americas and few multi-country studies addressed ethnic inequalities in health and wellbeing in the region. We aimed to investigate gaps in coverage of key health outcomes and socioeconomic inequalities between Afrodescendants and non-Afrodescendants populations in Latin American and Caribbean countries.MethodsUsing national household surveys (2011-2019) from ten countries, we analyzed absolute inequalities between Afrodescendants and a comparison group that includes non-Afrodescendants and non-Indigenous individuals (henceforth non-Afrodescendants) across 17 indicators in the continuum of reproductive, maternal, newborn, child, and adolescent health. These include indicators of family planning, antenatal care, delivery assistance, child nutrition, immunization coverage, child protection, access to improved water, sanitation and hygiene, adolescent fertility, and early childhood mortality. Inequalities between country-specific subgroups of Afrodescendants were also explored. The slope index of inequality was used to assess wealth-based inequalities within each ethnic group.FindingsAfrodescendants represented from 2·8% (Honduras) to 59·1% (Brazil) of the national samples. Of the 128 combinations of country and indicators with data, Afrodescendants fared worse in 78 (of which 33 were significant) and performed better in 50 (15 significant). More systematic disadvantages for Afrodescendants were found for demand for family planning satisfied, early marriage, and household handwashing and sanitation facilities. In contrast, Afrodescendants tended to present lower c-section rates and lower stunting prevalence. Honduras was the only country where Afrodescendants performed better than non-Afrodescendants in several indicators. Wealth gaps among Afrodescendants were wider than those observed for non-Afrodescendants for most indicators and across all countries.InterpretationGaps in health outcomes between Afrodescendants and non-Afrodescendants were observed in most countries, with more frequent disadvantages for the former although, in many cases, the gaps were reversed. Wealth inequalities within Afrodescendants tended to be wider than for non-Afrodescendants.FundingPan American Health Organization, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, and the Wellcome Trust.