BackgroundIn Bihar, one of the most populous and poorest states in India, caesarean sections have increased over the last decade. However, an aggregated caesarean section rate at the state level may conceal inequities at the district level.ObjectivesThe primary aim of this study was to analyse the inequalities in the geographical and socioeconomic distribution of caesarean sections between the districts of Bihar. The secondary aim was to compare the contribution of free-for-service government-funded public facilities and fee-for-service private facilities to the caesarean section rate.SettingBihar, with a population in the 2011 census of approximately 104 million people, has a low GDP per capita (US$610), compared with other Indian states. The state has the highest crude birth rate (26.1 per 1000 population) in India, with one baby born every two seconds. Bihar is divided into 38 administrative districts, 101 subdivisions and 534 blocks. Each district has a district (Sadar) hospital, and six districts also have one or more medical college hospitals.MethodsThis retrospective secondary data analysis was based on open-source national datasets from the 2015 and 2019 National Family Health Surveys, with respective sample sizes of 45 812 and 42 843 women aged 15–49 years.ParticipantsSecondary data analysis of pregnant women delivering in public and private institutions.ResultsThe caesarean section rate increased from 6.2% in 2015 to 9.7% in 2019 in Bihar. Districts with a lower proportion of poor population had higher caesarean section rates (R2=0.45) among all institutional births, with 10.3% in private and 2.9% in public facilities. Access to private caesarean sections decreased (R2=0.46) for districts with poorer populations.ConclusionMarked inequalities exist in access to caesarean sections. The public sector needs to be strengthened to improve access to obstetric services for those who need it most.
Background Accurate surveillance of population access to essential surgery is key for strategic healthcare planning. This study aimed to estimate population access to surgical facilities meeting standards for safe surgery equipment, specialized surgical personnel, and bellwether capability, cesarean delivery, emergency laparotomy, and long-bone fracture fixation and to evaluate the validity of using these standards to describe the full breadth of essential surgical care needs in Liberia. Method An observational study of surgical facilities was conducted in Liberia between 20 September and 8 November 2018. Facility data were combined with geospatial data and analysed in an online visualization platform. Results Data were collected from 51 of 52 surgical facilities. Nationally, 52.9 per cent of the population (2 392 000 of 4 525 000 people) had 2-h access to their closest surgical facility, whereas 41.1 per cent (1 858 000 people) and 48.6 per cent (2 199 000 people) had 2-h access to a facility meeting the personnel and equipment standards respectively. Six facilities performed all bellwether procedures; 38.7 per cent of the population (1 751 000 people) had 2-h access to one of these facilities. Bellwether-capable facilities were more likely to perform other essential surgical procedures (OR 3.13, 95 per cent c.i. 1.28 to 7.65; P = 0.012). These facilities delivered a median of 13.0 (i.q.r. 11.3–16.5) additional essential procedures. Conclusion Population access to essential surgery is limited in Liberia; strategies to reduce travel times ought to be part of healthcare policy. Policymakers should also be aware that bellwether capability might not be a valid proxy for the full breadth of essential surgical care in low-income settings.
Introduction The Lancet Commission on Global Surgery (LCoGS) set the benchmark of 5000 procedures per 100,000 population annually to meet surgical needs adequately. This systematic review provides an overview of the last ten years of surgical volumes in Low and Middle- Income-Countries (LMICs). Methodology We searched PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane, and EMBASE databases for studies from LMICs addressing surgical volume. The number of surgeries performed per 100,000 population was estimated. We used cesarean sections, hernia, and laparotomies as index cases for the surgical capacities of the country. Their proportions to total surgical volumes were estimated. The association of country-specific surgical volumes and the proportion of index cases with its Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita was analyzed. Results A total of 26 articles were included in this review. In LMICs, on average, 877 surgeries were performed per 100,000 population. The proportion of cesarean sections was found to be high in all LMICs, with an average of 30.1% of the total surgeries, followed by hernia (16.4%) and laparotomy (5.1%). The overall surgical volumes increased as the GDP per capita increased. The proportions of cesarean section and hernia to total surgical volumes decreased with increased GDP per capita. Significant heterogeneity was found in the methodologies to assess surgical volumes, and inconsistent reporting hindered comparison between countries. Conclusion Most LMICs have surgical volumes below the LCoGS benchmark of 5000 procedures per 100,000 population, with an average of 877 surgeries. The surgical volume increased while the proportions of hernia and cesarean sections reduced with increased GDP per capita. In the future, it's essential to apply uniform and reproducible data collection methods for obtaining multinational data that can be more accurately compared.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.