Equity in health care: An urban and rural, and gender perspective; the Suriname Health Study

CCF Smits; JR Toelsie; MGM Eersel; ISK Krishnadath; CCF Smits; JR Toelsie; MGM Eersel; ISK Krishnadath

doi:10.3934/publichealth.2018.1.1

AIMS Public Health

2018, Volume 5, Issue 1: 1-12. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2018.1.1

Previous Article Next Article

Research article Special Issues

Equity in health care: An urban and rural, and gender perspective; the Suriname Health Study

1.
Faculty of Medical Sciences, Department of Public Health, Anton de Kom University of Suriname
2.
Faculty of Medical Sciences, Department of Physiology, Anton de Kom University of Suriname

Received: 02 September 2017 Accepted: 02 January 2018 Published: 27 February 2018

Background: The literature reports that the use of healthcare services in urban areas compared to rural areas and by females compared to males is often higher. The aim of this study is to evaluate equity on geographical living area and gender for the use of primary and secondary healthcare in Suriname. Methods: We used 5,671 records (99%) from the Suriname Health study which was designed according to World Health Organization (WHO) Steps guidelines. We evaluated the Prevalence Ratio (PR) for living area and gender in using primary (PHC) and secondary healthcare (SHC) adjusted for the perceived need for healthcare, socio-economic factors and disease factors and the effect of all factors was measured. Results: Overall a percentage of 46.7 (95% Confidence Interval (CI) 45.1–48.4) had used primary healthcare and 12.7 (95% CI 11.6–13.8) secondary healthcare in the past 12 months. The PR for males compared to females was 0.75 (95% CI 0.70–0.81) for primary healthcare and 0.82 (95% CI 0.69–0.98) for secondary healthcare. The PR for urban and rural coastal areas compared to the rural interior was 1.52 (95 % CI 1.36–1.70) and 1.53 (95% CI 1.36–1.71), respectively. For the use of SHC, the PR for urban and rural coastal areas compared to the rural interior was 9.3 (95 % CI 5.44–15.89) and 8.58 (95% CI 4.98–14.81). The attributable effect of perceived healthcare-need to the PR of the urban and rural coastal areas was 39.64% and 37.81% compared to the rural interior for secondary healthcare. Further, 31.74% and 13.56% were due to socioeconomic factors. Conclusion: Although we observed equity between living areas for PHC use, for SHC use we observed a disadvantaged position for the rural interior, mainly influenced by socioeconomic factors. We measured gender equity for both PHC and SHC use.
- equity,
- healthcare use,
- gender differences,
- urban,
- rural coastal and rural interior,
- socio-economic factors,
- perceived illness
Citation: CCF Smits, JR Toelsie, MGM Eersel, ISK Krishnadath. Equity in health care: An urban and rural, and gender perspective; the Suriname Health Study[J]. AIMS Public Health, 2018, 5(1): 1-12. doi: 10.3934/publichealth.2018.1.1

Related Papers:

Abstract

Background: The literature reports that the use of healthcare services in urban areas compared to rural areas and by females compared to males is often higher. The aim of this study is to evaluate equity on geographical living area and gender for the use of primary and secondary healthcare in Suriname. Methods: We used 5,671 records (99%) from the Suriname Health study which was designed according to World Health Organization (WHO) Steps guidelines. We evaluated the Prevalence Ratio (PR) for living area and gender in using primary (PHC) and secondary healthcare (SHC) adjusted for the perceived need for healthcare, socio-economic factors and disease factors and the effect of all factors was measured. Results: Overall a percentage of 46.7 (95% Confidence Interval (CI) 45.1–48.4) had used primary healthcare and 12.7 (95% CI 11.6–13.8) secondary healthcare in the past 12 months. The PR for males compared to females was 0.75 (95% CI 0.70–0.81) for primary healthcare and 0.82 (95% CI 0.69–0.98) for secondary healthcare. The PR for urban and rural coastal areas compared to the rural interior was 1.52 (95 % CI 1.36–1.70) and 1.53 (95% CI 1.36–1.71), respectively. For the use of SHC, the PR for urban and rural coastal areas compared to the rural interior was 9.3 (95 % CI 5.44–15.89) and 8.58 (95% CI 4.98–14.81). The attributable effect of perceived healthcare-need to the PR of the urban and rural coastal areas was 39.64% and 37.81% compared to the rural interior for secondary healthcare. Further, 31.74% and 13.56% were due to socioeconomic factors. Conclusion: Although we observed equity between living areas for PHC use, for SHC use we observed a disadvantaged position for the rural interior, mainly influenced by socioeconomic factors. We measured gender equity for both PHC and SHC use.

References

[1]	Equity. World Health Organization. Available from: http://www.who.int/healthsystems/topics/equity/en/.
[2]	De Vogli R (2014) The financial crisis, health and health inequities in Europe: the need for regulations, redistribution and social protection. Int J Equity Health 13: 58.
[3]	Hamalainen RM, Sandu P, Syed AM, et al. (2016) An evaluation of equity and equality in physical activity policies in four European countries. Int J Equity Health 15: 191.
[4]	Malqvist M, Hoa DT, Liem NT, et al. (2013) Ethnic minority health in Vietnam: a review exposing horizontal inequity. Glob Health Action 6: 1–19.
[5]	Friel S, Marmot MG (2011) Action on the social determinants of health and health inequities goes global. Annu Rev Public Health 32: 225–236.
[6]	Braveman P (2006) Health disparities and health equity: concepts and measurement. Annu Rev Public Health 27: 167–194.
[7]	Starfield B, Gervas J, Mangin D (2012) Clinical care and health disparities. Annu Rev Public Health 33: 89–106.
[8]	Constitution of the World Health Organization. Available from: http://www.who.int/governance/eb/who_constitution_en.pdf.
[9]	Declaration of Alma-Ata. Available from: http://www.who.int/publications/almaata_declaration_en.pdf.
[10]	Evans T, Whitehead M, Diderichsen F (2001) Challenging Inequities in Health – From Ethics to Action. Oxford University Press.
[11]	Sheiham A (2009) Closing the gap in a generation: health equity through action on the social determinants of health. A report of the WHO Commission on Social Determinants of Health (CSDH) 2008. Community Dent Health 26: 2–3.
[12]	Medische Zending Primary Health Care Suriname. Available from: http//www.medischezending.sr.
[13]	World Bank's new all-inclusive Data Catalog. Available from: https://data.worldbank.org/country/suriname.
[14]	National Health Sector Plan 2011–2018. Paramaribo Suriname: Ministry of Health.
[15]	Krishnadath IS, Smits CC, Jaddoe VW, et al. (2015) A National Surveillance Survey on Noncommunicable Disease Risk Factors: Suriname Health Study Protocol. JMIR Res Protoc 4: e75. doi: 10.2196/resprot.4205
[16]	WHO. STEPwise approach to surveillance (2014). Geneva,Switzerland: World Health Organization. Available from : http://www.who.int/chp/steps/en/.
[17]	Kish L (1949) A Procedure for objective respndent selection within the household. J Am Stat Assoc 44: 380–387.
[18]	Esteves RJ (2012) The quest for equity in Latin America: a comparative analysis of the health care reforms in Brazil and Colombia. Int J Equity Health 11: 6. doi: 10.1186/1475-9276-11-6
[19]	Atun R, Odorico L, de Andrade M, et al. (2015) Health-system reform and universal health coverage in Latin America. Lancet 385: 1230–1247.
[20]	Sobhie R, De Abreu-Kisoensingh A, Dekkers G (2016) Materiele welvaart en armoede onder huishoudens. In: Menke J. (ed.) Mozaiek van het Surinaamse volk – Volkstellingen in demografisch,economisch en sociaal perspectief, Paramaribo, Suriname.: ABS en IGSR, 356–377.
[21]	Hiwat H, Hardjopawiro LS, Takken W, et al. (2012) Novel strategies lead to pre-elimination of malaria in previously high-risk areas in Suriname, South America. Malar J 11: 10.
[22]	Eersel M, Vreden S, van Eer E, et al. (2017) Fifty Years Of Primary Health Care In The Rainforest. Temporal Trends In Morbidity And Mortality In Indigenous Amerindian Populations Of Suriname. J Glob Health.
[23]	Eersel M, Krishnadath I, van Eer E, et al. (2017) Metabolic syndrome in indigenous Amerindian women in Suriname; Less on waist and more on weight? J Obes Overweig 3: 201.
[24]	Krishnadath IS, Jaddoe VW, Nahar-van Venrooij LM, et al. (2016) Ethnic differences in prevalence and risk factors for hypertension in the Suriname Health Study: a cross sectional population study. Popul Health Metr 14: 33.
[25]	Krishnadath IS, Nahar-van Venrooij LM, Jaddoe VW, et al. (2016) Ethnic differences in prediabetes and diabetes in the Suriname Health Study. BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care 4: e000186.
[26]	Richard L, Furler J, Densley K, et al. (2014) Equity of access to primary healthcare for vulnerable populations: the IMPACT international online survey of innovations. Int J Equity Health 15: 64.
[27]	Carretero MT, Calderon-Larranaga A, Poblador-Plou B, et al. (2014) Primary health care use from the perspective of gender and morbidity burden. BMC Womens Health 14: 145. doi: 10.1186/s12905-014-0145-2
[28]	Song Y, Bian Y (2014) Gender differences in the use of health care in China: cross-sectional analysis. Int J Equity Health 13: 8.
[29]	Yousaf O, Grunfeld EA, Hunter MS (2015) A systematic review of the factors associated with delays in medical and psychological help-seeking among men. Health Psychol Rev 9: 264–276. doi: 10.1080/17437199.2013.840954
[30]	Case A, Paxson C (2005) Sex differences in morbidity and mortality. Demography 42: 189–214. doi: 10.1353/dem.2005.0011
[31]	Wang Y, Hunt K, Nazareth I (2013) Do men consult less than women? An analysis of routinely collected UK general practice data. BMJ Open 3: e003320.
[32]	Gerritsen AA, Deville WL (2009) Gender differences in health and health care utilisation in various ethnic groups in the Netherlands: a cross-sectional study. BMC Public Health 9: 109.
[33]	Marmot M, Allen JJ (2014) Social determinants of Health Equity. Am J Public Health 4: S517–S519.
[34]	Tong V, Raynor DK, Aslani P (2014) Gender differences in health and medicine information seeking behavior – A review. J Malta Coll Pharm Pract 20: 14–16.
[35]	Stolses Bergamo PM, Fraga Bastos FT, Sarmento Costa K (2014) The use of medication and associated factors among adults living in Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil: differences between men and women. Cien Saude Colet 19: 4909–4921.
[36]	Pappa E, Niakas D (2006) Assessment of health care needs and utilization in a mixed public-private system: the case of the Athens area. BMC Health Serv Res 6: 146. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-6-146
[37]	Buffel V, van de Velde S, Bracke P (2014) Professional care seeking for mental health problems among women and men in Europe: the role of socioeconomic, family-related and mental health status factors in explaining gender differences. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol 49: 1641–1653. doi: 10.1007/s00127-014-0879-z
[38]	WHO: Intimate partner and sexual violence against women. (2016) In: Fact sheet WHO.
[39]	Devries KM, Mak JY, Garcia-Moreno C, et al. (2013) Global health. The global prevalence of intimate partner violence against women. Science 340: 1527–1528.
[40]	Patrikar SBD, Bhatti V, Chatterjee K, et al. (2017) Association between intimate partner violence & HIV/AIDS: Exploring the pathways in Indian context. Indian J Med Res 145: 815–823. doi: 10.4103/ijmr.IJMR_1782_14
[41]	Guruge S (2012) Intimate partner violence: a global health perspective. Can J Nurs Res 44: 36–54.
[42]	Roy AL, Raver CC (2014) Are all risks equal? Early experiences of poverty-related risk and children's functioning. J Fam Psychol 28: 391–400.
[43]	Martin MA, Lippert AM (2012) Feeding her children, but risking her health: the intersection of gender, household food insecurity and obesity. Soc Sci Med 74: 1754–1764. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.11.013
[44]	Thomas KJ (2011) Familial influences on poverty among young children in black immigrant, U.S. born black, and nonblack immigrant families. Demography 48: 437–460.
[45]	Warren AC (2010) Women's employment and changing gender relations in Puerto Rico. Caribb Stud 38: 59–91.
[46]	Goebel A, Dodson B, Hill T (2010) Urban advantage or Urban penalty? A case study of female-headed households in a South African city. Health Place 16: 573–580.
[47]	Zekeri AA (2007) Livelihood strategies of food-insecure poor, female-headed families in rural Alabama. Psychol Rep 101: 1031–1036. doi: 10.2466/pr0.101.4.1031-1036
[48]	Akinsola HA, Popovich JM (2002) The quality of life of families of female-headed households in Botswana: a secondary analysis of case studies. Health Care Women Int 23: 761–772. doi: 10.1080/07399330290107502
[49]	Family and household composition. Volksgezondheidsmonitor Utrecht, 2017. Available from: http://www.volksgezondheidsmonitor.nl.
[50]	U.S. Department of Health and Human Services HRaSA. Maternal and Child Health Bureau Women's Health USA 2013. Rocckville, Maryland: U.S. Available from: https://mchb.hrsa.gov.
[51]	Hecora (2008) Analyse en aanbevelingen over de statistische data van de Stichting RGD 2000–2004. Paramaribo Suriname: Ministerie van Volksgezondheid.
[52]	Tille F, Gibis B, Balke K (2017) Sociodemographic and health-related determinants of health care utilization and access to primary and specialist care: Results of a nationwide population survey in Germany 2006–2016. Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes 126: 52–65. doi: 10.1016/j.zefq.2017.07.012
[53]	Cheatham CT, Barksdale DJ, Rodgers SG (2008) Barriers to health care and health-seeking behaviors faced by Black men. J Am Acad Nurse Pract 20: 555–562. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-7599.2008.00359.x
[54]	Hawkins J, Watkins DC, Kieffer E, et al. (2015) Psychosocial Factors That Influence Health Care Use and Self-Management for African American and Latino Men With Type 2 Diabetes. An Exploratory Study. J Men's Stud 23: 161–176. doi: 10.1177/1060826515582495
[55]	Gorman B, Wade B, Solazzo A (2016) Women Go and Men Stay Home? Gender and the Utilization of Preventive Medical Care among Asian and Latino Adults. In: Kronenfeld J. (ed.), Special Social Groups, Social Factors and Disparities in Health and Health Care - Research in the Sociology of Health Care Volume 34 Emerald Group Publishing Limited, 97–132.
[56]	Antonius-Smits C, Beek C, Cheuk-Alam I, et al. (2017) Chronic disease risk factor surveillance data book for Suriname, Paramaribo Suriname: Anton de Kom University of Suriname Department of Public Health.
[57]	Antonius-Smits C (2016) Gezondheid in Suriname: een analyse van chronische aandoeningen, beperkingen en sporten in 2012. In: Menk J. (ed.) Mozaiek van het Surinaamse volk. – Volkstellingen in demografisch, economisch en sociaal perspectief, Paramaribo, Suriname:ABS en IGSR, 204–230.
[58]	Baker P, Dworkin SL, Tong S, et al. (2014) The men's health gap: men must be included in the global health equity agenda. Bull World Health Organ 92: 618–620. doi: 10.2471/BLT.13.132795

Reader Comments

Your name:*

Email:*
© 2018 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)