Obstacles and opportunities for monitoring ethnicity-based inequalities in maternal health care: Lessons from Mexico

Ethnic inequalities in reproductive, maternal, newborn and child health interventions in Ecuador: A study of the 2004 and 2012 national surveys

BACKGROUND

Analysis 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.

METHODS

Analysis 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.

FINDINGS

In 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.

INTERPRETATION

While 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.

FUNDING

This paper was made possible with funds from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation [Grant Number: INV-007,594/OPP1148933].

Healthcare professionals' experiences and perceptions regarding health care of indigenous pregnant women in Ecuador

BACKGROUND

Pregnancy is an important life experience that requires uniquely tailored approach to health care. The socio-cultural care practices of indigenous pregnant women (IPW) are passed along the maternal line with respect to identity, worldview and nature. The cultural differences between non-indigenous healthcare professionals (HPs) and IPW could present a great challenge in women's health care. This article presents an analysis from a human rights and gender perspective of this potential cultural divide that could affect the health of the IPW in an Andean region of Ecuador with the objective of describing the health challenges of IPWs as rights holders through the experiences and perceptions of HP as guarantors of rights.

METHODS

We conducted 15 in-depth interviews with HPs who care for IPW in Chimborazo, Pichincha provinces of Ecuador. We utilized a semi-structured interview guide including questions about the experiences and perceptions of HPs in delivering health care to IPW. The interviews were recorded, transcribed and subjected to thematic analysis in Spanish and translated for reporting.

RESULTS

We found disagreements and discrepancies in the Ecuadorian health service that led to the ignorance of indigenous cultural values. Common characteristics among the indigenous population such as illiteracy, low income and the age of pregnancy are important challenges for the health system. The gender approach highlights the enormous challenges: machismo, gender stereotypes and communication problems that IPWs face in accessing quality healthcare.

CONCLUSIONS

Understanding the diverse perspectives of IPW, acknowledging their human rights particularly those related to gender, has the potential to lead to more comprehensive and respectful health care delivery in Ecuador. Further, recognizing there is a gender and power differential between the provider and the IPW can lead to improvements in the quality of health care delivery and reproductive, maternal and child health outcomes.

How the choice of ethnic indicator influences ethnicity-based inequities in maternal health care in four Latin American countries: who is indigenous?

Background

The current focus on monitoring health inequalities and the complexity around ethnicity requires careful consideration of how ethnic disparities are measured and presented. This paper aims to determine how inequalities in maternal healthcare by ethnicity change according to different criteria used to classify indigenous populations.

Methods

Nationally representative demographic surveys from Bolivia, Guatemala, Mexico, and Peru (2008–2016) were used to explore coverage gaps across maternal health care by ethnicity using different criteria. Women were classified as indigenous through self-identification (SI), spoken indigenous language (SIL), or indigenous household (IH). We compared the gaps through measuring coverage ratios (CR) with adjusted Poisson regression models.

Results

Proportions of indigenous women changed significantly according to the identification criterion (Bolivia:SI-63.1%/SIL-37.7%; Guatemala:SI-49.7%/SIL-28.2%; Peru:SI-34%/SIL-6.3% & Mexico:SI-29.7%/SIL-6.9%). Indigenous in all countries, regardless of their identification, had less coverage. Gaps in care between indigenous and non-indigenous populations changed, for all indicators and countries, depending on the criterion used (e.g., Bolivia CR for contraceptive-use SI = 0.70, SIL = 0.89; Guatemala CR for skilled-birth-attendant SI = 0.77, SIL = 0.59). The heterogeneity persists when the reference groups are modified and compare just to non-indigenous (e.g., Bolivia CR for contraceptive-use under SI = 0.64, SIL = 0.70; Guatemala CR for Skilled-birth-attendant under SI = 0.77, SIL = 0.57).

Conclusions

The indigenous identification criteria could have an impact on the measurement of inequalities in the coverage of maternal health care. Given the complexity and diversity observed, it is not possible to provide a definitive direction on the best way to define indigenous populations to measure inequalities. In practice, the categorization will depend on the information available. Our results call for greater care in the analysis of ethnicity-based inequalities. A greater understanding on how the indigenous are classified when assessing inequalities by ethnicity can help stakeholders to deliver interventions responsive to the needs of these groups.