Wednesday, 3 May 2017

Poor health access and ongoing caesarean epidemic

Vaccine in the fight against measles Rubella
Source: UNICEF India
A staggering five women die every hour in India due to causes related to pregnancy and childbirth. And two-thirds of the around 45,000 such deaths annually occur outside any medical facility, that is, either at homes or en route to hospitals.
This is despite a slow improvement in the maternal mortality ratio (MMR) in the country. As appropriate medical surveillance and intervention can almost entirely prevent maternal deaths, MMR is deemed a sensitive indicator of the general quality of a health system, according to the World Health Organisation.
Hence, this abysmal mortality rate reflects a general lack of physical and financial access to healthcare, which is a fact of life for many Indian households.
Yet, a bizarre and parallel narrative is unfolding across the country.
In contrast to such under-provisioning of maternal care, there is an emergent story of over-provisioning too, in rich and poor states alike. And nothing demonstrates this phenomenon better than the “Caesarean Epidemic.”
A caesarean section or a C-section is a delivery through a surgical incision in the mother’s abdomen and uterus, in situations where a vaginal delivery could put the baby or mother at medical risk. However, disturbingly, more pregnant women in India are going under the scalpel for deliveries than is normal.
The WHO made it unequivocally clear in a 2015 statement that C-section rates higher than 10% do not help reduce maternal and newborn mortality rates. But India crossed this threshold way back in 2005 when the figure hit 10.6%.
image-01
While the media has reported on the issue before, the latest numbers released by the National Family Health Survey (NFHS 2015-16) once again underline the acute problem.

A cross-section

While national-level data is yet to be published, here’s a look at the numbers from five states: Uttar Pradesh (UP), Goa, Punjab, Uttarakhand, and Manipur.
While representing the country’s socio-economic diversity, and holding a mirror to the national situation, these states are also important because they are now at various stages of holding elections to their legislative assemblies. In each of these, the numbers pose a public health threat.
Notably, the increase in the rate of C-sections over the last decade seems to be largely driven by the private sector in these states.
As we await the latest data from UP, it is safe to say that among the five states, at least one in three deliveries in private hospitals are by C-section. And analysis of NFHS 2015-16 data shows that in states like Goa and Manipur, it is one in two deliveries.
Meanwhile, even a poor state like UP has districts like Banda (58.7%), Basti (38.1%), Gorakhpur (39.5%), Pilibhit (40.8%) and Sonbhadra (39.7%) with very high proportions of C-sections in private hospitals, as data from the Annual Health Survey 2012-13 suggests.
In many of Punjab’s districts, the share is more than half.
image-02

A bizarre fad

The main reasons cited for undergoing C-sections are: to avoid the excruciating pain of normal childbirth, doctor’s convenience, profiteering, and cultural issues like the “mahurat baby” fad. However, reducing a C-section to a minor procedure resorted to for convenience’s sake trivialises the risks involved.
As the WHO points out, like any major surgery, “Caesarean sections are associated with short and long term risk which can extend many years beyond the current delivery and affect the health of the woman, her child, and future pregnancies.”
In 2013, The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists issued a statement against what is known as “maternal-request caesareans” or C-sections done at the request of the mother without a medical condition. It said that women undergoing C-sections face the risk of infection as well as bladder and bowel injuries during surgery, along with serious complications like placental problems, uterine rupture, and emergency hysterectomy.
If nothing, India has another major reason to immediately deal with the epidemic. Babies born vaginally have fewer respiratory problems. A 2014 study showed that C-section babies have a considerably increased risk for asthma.
Given the alarming rates of pollution across our country, especially its cities, and the already high burden of respiratory infections, Indian parents seeking a convenient C-section may be unwittingly gifting their child a chronic disease.
Systematic studies to establish the connection between the burden of asthma in children and C-section will be a first step towards the long-term management of this public health problem, particularly in regions that are the hot spots.
It is heartening that many influential doctors have themselves begun advocating against medically unnecessary C-sections. A recent online petition demanding the union health ministry to mandate hospitals to publicly declare the share of C-section deliveries indicates a growing public awareness.
Will it turn into concrete action? Only time will tell.
This commentary originally appeared in Quartz India.
The views expressed above belong to the author(s).

A new vision for US-India partnership in the Pacific

In January 2015, India and the US released the US-India Joint Strategic Vision for the Asia Pacific and Indian Ocean Region. There have been a great many political, security, and economic developments in both countries.
What is the current state of progress on the many topics outlined in the Strategic Vision — regional economic integration, safeguarding maritime security, India’s drive to join APEC, and improving bi and multilateral consultation mechanisms?

Speakers

Aparna Pande, Research Fellow and Director, Initiative on the Future of India and South Asia, The Hudson Institute
Jeff M. Smith, Director of Asian Security Programs and Kraemer Strategy Fellow, American Foreign Policy Council
Sunjoy Joshi, Director, ORF
Walter Lohman, Director, Asian Studies Center, The Heritage Foundation


This event is being held in Washington DC. The timing is from 10:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. EST.

The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor: Regional ramifications

Pakistan views China as its most reliable ally in the world, a trustworthy source of military and economic security. Dependence on China has increased with the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), part of China’s One Belt One Road (OBOR) Initiative. CPEC, initially valued at $46 billion, is being perceived in Pakistan as the panacea of all its problems. Will CPEC help Pakistan’s economy grow and boom? Or will CPEC burden Pakistan with high interest loans it might find almost impossible to repay?  In a country facing inter-provincial tensions will CPEC further exacerbate these frictions? How does India look at CPEC?

Speakers

Amb. Husain Haqqani, Senior Fellow and Director, South and Central Asia, Hudson Institute
Christine Fair, Distinguished Professor, School of Foreign Service, Georgetown University
Samir Saran, Vice President, ORF
This event is being held in Washington DC. The timing of the event is from 10:00 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. EST.

India reduces baby deaths but still hasn’t met 2012 targets

Mother and newborn child in Odisha
Source:Wikimedia
First, the good news: 37 babies died for every 1,000 that were born in 2015, two better than the government’s projections of an infant mortality rate (IMR) of 39 for that year, according to new data released last week. That’s a drop of 53% over 25 years.
Now, the bad news: The target for IMR reduction was 67%; it has fallen 10 short of the target 27 that India agreed to under the 2015 millennium development goals (MDGs), set in consultation with the United Nations. India has also not achieved the IMR target of 30 that the government itself set for 2012.
To get an idea of India’s global standing, compare its 2015 IMR average of 37 with IMRs of 35 for 154 low and middle-income nations; 5 for 26 north American nations and 3 for 39 nations in the Euro area.
There were wide variations in IMR–a bellwether of national health–across India, according to the latest report from the Sample Registration System (SRS) bulletin, with smaller, more literate states reporting IMRs close to or better than richer countries and larger, poorer states reporting more deaths than poorer countries, indicating the uneven nature of healthcare.
The overall improvement in IMR over a quarter century is likely linked to a variety of government interventions, including institutional deliveries and providing iron and folic-acid tablets to pregnant women, and rising incomes and living circumstances since economic liberalisation in 1991.

Goa matches China, Madhya Pradesh is worse than Ethiopia

Of 36 Indian states and union territories (UTs), the lowest IMRs were reported from Goa and Manipur with nine infant deaths per 1,000 live births–that is the same as China, Bulgaria and Costa Rica and one better than the consolidated figure for Europe and Central Asia, according to 2015 World Bank data.
In contrast, Madhya Pradesh reported India’s highest IMR with 50 infant deaths per 1,000 live births, or worse than Ethiopia and Ghana and marginally better than disaster-wracked Haiti (52) and unstable Zimbabwe (47), but better than its 2014 rate of 52.
Uttarakhand was the only state that reported a worsening in its IMR, from 33 infant deaths for every 1,000 live births in 2014 to 34 in 2015.

Highest And Lowest Infant Mortality Rates, 2015

Graph-1
Source: Sample Registration System Bulletin, 2015

Over 15 years, the mystery of growing deaths in Mizoram and the Andamans

The Andaman and Nicobar Islands and Mizoram are the only state or union territories whose infant mortality rates worsened over 15 years. While the Andaman’s current and 2000 rates are within the Indian MDG target for 2015, infant mortality there increased almost 22%. The situation in Mizoram is more puzzling: Infant mortality rose by more than 80% over 2000, the main acceleration beginning in 2008.
Graph-2
Source: Sample Registration System Bulletin
In terms of MDG progress, from the larger states, only Tamil Nadu has met its state MDG target with a reduction of 67% in IMR to reach 19 infant deaths per 1,000 live births in 2015. Sikkim, Manipur and Daman and Diu have all achieved a two-third reduction from their 1991 estimates. Goa, Maharashtra, Puducherry, Punjab, Jammu and Kashmir, Arunachal Pradesh and Odisha have all come very close to achieving their MDG state-specific targets.
While Kerala doesn’t feature on the list–its IMR for 2015 is 12, and well within India’s national MDG target–that is because its IMR for 1990 was as low as 17 to begin with. The latest numbers also show a significant rural-urban gap for IMR, with the gap decreasing slowly, largely because urban rates are on the lower end of the IMR spectrum and so slower to decline.

Girls continue to die in larger numbers than boys

Infant girls in India continue to die at a greater rates than infant boys, and there has been almost no reduction in the gap in IMRs, the new data reveal.
Male babies have an IMR of 35 deaths per 1,000 live births, while female babies have an IMR of 39 per 1,000 live births.
Eight states had IMR lower than the Indian national average for 2015. These include seven poor states singled out for special attention, the so-called Empowered Action Group (EAG)–excluding Jharkhand–and Meghalaya. The higher-than-average rates in these states–EAG states include Bihar, Jharkhand, Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Orissa, Rajasthan and Assam–were largely equally above the norm for both male and female infants, a trend reflected over time.

Why the rate of babies dying is a bellwether to India’s well-being

The factors that impact the IMR also reflect the well-being of a nation.
Environmental and living conditions, rates of illness, health of mothers and their access to quality pre- and post-natal care contribute to infant survival rates.
Just as rural-urban differentials in the IMR are sizeable and significant, so too are the differentials by wealth. In other words, babies born in poorer families tend to die in larger numbers. The poor are the most vulnerable to health disadvantages and the IMR tends to reflect that. We will have to wait for the release of data from the National Family Health Survey 4 (NFHS-4), gathered in 2015-16, for the current status of the difference in death rates between babies born in poor and rich families.
However, these inequities in mortality reflect not just differences in access to health services for both children and mothers but also inadequacies of India’s public health system and its inability to deliver quality and equitable services.

Could efforts to transform health affect elections?

The National Rural Health Mission, launched in 2005, set India’s IMR target as 30 deaths per 1,000 live births by 2012. However, we have still not been able to achieve in 2017 the target set for 2012.
Health has rarely ever taken centrestage as a poll issue in legislative assembly elections in India, despite its importance to overall development and growth. Health is a state subject but political parties rarely  make health issues a part of their manifestos, possibly because the effort to achieve results exceed the election cycle.
However, focusing on targets such as infant mortality and other reproductive, maternal, newborn and child- health indicators could yield results that fit into the election cycle.
Taking a closer look at IMR achievements for the five states with upcoming elections, there are mixed results. Uttarakhand’s IMR in 2015 was 34, the same as in 2012. In 2014 and 2015, the state reported increases in infant mortality from previous years.
Graph-3
Source: Sample Registration System Bulletin
Goa, Manipur and Punjab have successfully achieved the Indian MDG target for 2015, with a reduction of more than 60% in IMR. Uttarakhand and Uttar Pradesh (UP) have decreased mortality rates since 2000, but they both fall short of the India target, with UP–with 46 infant deaths for 1,000 live birth– reporting one of India’s highest infant mortality rates in 2015.
Graph-4
Source: Sample Registration System Bulletin

The failures of 2015 will affect goals for 2030

India has reduced its IMR by 53% over 25 years, instead of the 67% it had set in its MDG target.
The MDG achievements of 2015 set the base for the 2030 sustainable development goals (SDGs). While infant mortality is not a target the SDGs will monitor, it will monitor neonatal mortality–death during the first 28 days of life–a key component of infant mortality.
Neonatal mortality largely stems from poor maternal health, inadequate antenatal care, improper management of pregnancy complications and delivery related complications.
In 2013, neonatal mortality contributed to 68% of all infant deaths in India, and it will continue to represent an increasing proportion of child deaths. The prime minister’s Maternity Benefit Scheme– which appears to be a universalisation and expansion of the Indira Gandhi Matritva Sahyog Yojana, the Indira Gandhi Conditional Maternity Benefit–could possibly be a step that will better maternal health and delivery outcomes through conditional cash transfers.
If India is to achieve its SDG targets across gender, wealth and caste, it needs more attention directed towards infant and maternal health policies, or 2030 will–once again–see India falling short of its health targets.
(The author is a research intern working in ORF Delhi)
This commentary was published in IndiaSpend
The views expressed above belong to the author(s).

Down to the district: The health of 5 states going to polls

Measuring for malnutrition in MP
Source: Wikimedia
While healthcare has largely been a neglected issue in past Indian general elections, major parties started talking about health in their manifestos from 2004.
In some states, there’s evidence it is becoming increasingly important, this 2014 Lancetreport said, citing the Rajiv Aarogyasri Community Health Insurance Scheme for poor families as a major reason for a second term in 2009 for the late Andhra Pradesh chief minister Y S R Reddy, and Gujarat’s Chiranjeevi Yojana, which provides skilled healthcare to pregnant women in collaboration with the private sector and contributed to Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s popularity when he was chief minister.
Healthcare is important to political and economic debate because inadequate public healthcare and healthcare expenses push an additional 55 million people back into poverty in India every year, according to this 2015 Lancet paper.
However, health-related political discussions are, currently, limited to debates around major health scams, or state failure during severe epidemic outbreaks. In general, electoral battles have not been won or lost because of healthcare issues.

India has a healthcare crisis, but solutions need to be state- and district-specific

While India still has more wasted (low weight-for-height) and stunted (low height-for-age) children than any other country–about 40 million–the rate of obesity recorded an 8.6-fold increase in India’s rural areas over 14 years and a 1.7-fold increase in urban areas over 20 years, reported in June 2016.
More than half of India’s rural population uses private healthcare, which is four times as costly as public healthcare, and can cost the poorest 20% of Indians more than 15 times their average monthly expenditure; shortages of doctors at public health centres have risen 200% over a decade, and even cities such as Mumbai need to double staffing of public healthcare (details herehere and here).
The five states going into polls represent the good, the bad and the ugly of nutrition and health in India, our analysis showed. The trends are so diverse that it is clear that no single set of solutions can be the answer. India needs state-specific, if not district-specific, solutions in health and nutrition.

Problems with early marriage and sex ratio in relatively advanced Manipur and Goa

The percentage of women currently aged 20-24 who were married before reaching the age 18 has declined in all the states going to elections, with the exception of Manipur, where their percentage increased from 12.7% to 13.1%, according to the National Family Health Survey (NFHS) reports for 2015-16, released over 2016 and 2017.
In 2015, Punjab had an even lower proportion of women (currently aged 20-24) married before age 18 than Goa, declining from 19.7% in 2005 to 7.6% in 2015. Goa still has 9.8% women (currently aged 20-24) who were married before age 18.
Manipur also has 65.9% children fully immunised.
The latest NFHS data release shows that between 2005 and 2015, Manipur’s sex ratio at birth declined from 1,014 to 962. For a state known to be a showcase of women’s empowerment, this must come as a wake-up call. A girl born in Manipur was more likely to be educated; more likely to be working as an adult; more likely to survive childbirth and more likely to not be the victim of crime than in most Indian states.
Manipur’s Women: Once Better Than Many In India
IndicatorManipurIndiaManipur’s Rank in India
Sex ratio (Females per 1,000 males)9879405th
Female literacy73%65%11th
Proportion of women in the workforce41%26%2nd
Maternal mortality rate (deaths per 100,000 live births)64178NA
Crime rate against women (Cases registered under crimes against women per 1,00,000 female population)21%54%26th (4th lowest)
Note: Rankings are among 29 states; they do not include union territories.
Uttarakhand also showed a decline in sex ratio at birth. Goa and Punjab showed improvement. NFHS data for Uttar Pradesh are not yet out. The government’s Sample Registration System (SRS) reports show that between 2011 and 2014, there was a decline in UP’s sex ratio at birth, from 875 to 869.

Infant, maternal mortality: Vast variations within states, districts reveal clearer picture

Uttarakhand has shown the slowest improvement in infant mortality rate (IMR)–deaths per 1,000 live births–although NFHS data for UP are yet to be released. Still, as SRS data show, UP’s IMR has come down from 57 to 48 between 2011 and 2014, suggesting that NFHS data will show improvement between 2005 and 2015.
Image-01
Source: National Family Health Survey (NFHS); *Data for Uttar Pradesh are yet to be released
However, as our state-specific analysis to follow will show, states such as UP reveal wide variations within districts in terms of IMR. For example, according to the Annual Health Survey (2012-13), the latest district level data available for UP, the IMR in Shrawasti district at 96 (the worst IMR in India was 56 in Madhya Pradesh in 2012) was almost three times as much as in Kanpur Nagar, which had an IMR of 37 (comparable to Gujarat’s 38 in 2012).
UP’s Infant Mortality Rate, By District (2012-13)
Image-02
Source: Annual Health Survey (2012-13);
The government does not provide maternal mortality ratio (MMR)–deaths per 100,000 births–estimates for small states such as Goa and Manipur, The Wire reported in July 2016. Still, there are not many indicators that reveal inter-state health variations within India like MMR does.
The MMR in UP and Uttarakhand is almost five times that in Kerala, the state with the lowest MMR among major states. Yet, in states with high maternal mortality, political parties do not discuss plans to reduce these preventable deaths.
Image-03
Source: Sample Registration System

Undernutrition is key determinant of ill-health in all five states

Undernutrition is a major underlying determinant of ill-health in all the election-bound states, and the difference between states is not as stark, as it is with, say, MMR.
For example, across the electoral-battleground states, the proportion of stunted children under the age of five were similar: 29% in Manipur, 20% in Goa, 26% in Punjab  and 34% in Uttarakhand for the year 2015-16. The latest data for UP are awaited.
Image-04
Source: National Family Health Survey (NFHS); *Data for Uttar Pradesh are yet to be released

Doing too much is as bad as doing too little: The nuances of healthcare

Under-provisioning of healthcare is a major Indian problem, but so, often, is over-provisioning.
In 2015, for instance, in rural areas of Kapurthala district in Punjab, 61.5% of all deliveries in private hospitals and clinics were caesarean. In Manipur’s Imphal West district, almost two of every three deliveries in private hospitals were caesarean. Public facilities also have a high proportion of caesarean deliveries, although not to the extent reported from private facilities, as we analyse in the state-specific stories.
Similarly, undernutrition is a major issue, as is over-nutrition.