Search

Background: Health is recognized as a fundamental right in Brazil's constitution. In the absence of a clearly defined benefit packages of healthcare services that are financed under the Unified Health System (Sistema Único de Saúde, SUS), courts have become important in adjudicating coverage decisions. Empirical assessments of equity and the right to health tend to focus on simple measures of access. However, these empirical perspectives belie the significant inequalities and rights violations that arise in the case of more complex health needs such as cancer. To shed light on these issues, this paper focuses on the care pathways for breast and cervical cancer and explores access and quality issues that arise at different points along the care pathway with implications for the realization of the right to health in Brazil. Method: A mixed method approach is used. The analysis is primarily based on a quantitative analysis of national representative administrative data principally from the cervical and breast cancer information systems and the hospital cancer registry. To gain more insights into the organization of cancer care, qualitative data was collected from the state of Bahia, through document analysis, direct observation, roundtable discussions with health workers (HWs), and structured interviews with health care administrators. Results: The paper reveals that the volume of completed screening exams is well below the estimated need, and a tendency toward lower breast cancer screening rates in poorer states and for women in the lowest income brackets. Only 26% of breast cancer cases and 29% of cervical cancer cases are diagnosed at an early stage (stage 0 or I), thereby reducing the survival prospects of patients. Waiting times between confirmed diagnosis and treatment are long, despite new legislation that guarantees a maximum of 60 days. The waiting times are significantly longer for patients that follow the recommended patient pathways, and who are diagnosed outside the hospital. Conclusion: The study reveals that there are large variations between states and patients, where the poorest states and patients fare worse on key indicators. More broadly, the paper shows the importance of collecting data both on patient characteristics and health system performance and carry out detailed health system analysis for exposing, empirically, rights violations and for identifying how they can be addressed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Research on the needs of people with disability is scarce, which promotes inadequate programs. Community Based Inclusive Development interventions aim to promote rights but demand a high level of community participation. This study aimed to identify prioritized needs as well as lessons learned for successful project implementation in different Latin American communities. Methods: This study was based on a Community Based Inclusive Development project conducted from 2018 to 2021 led by a Columbian team in Columbia, Brazil and Bolivia. Within a sequential mixed methods design, we first retrospectively analyzed the project baseline data and then conducted Focus Group Discussions, together with ratings of community participation levels. Quantitative descriptive and between group analysis of the baseline survey were used to identify and compare sociodemographic characteristics and prioritized needs of participating communities. We conducted qualitative thematic analysis on Focus Group Discussions, using deductive main categories for triangulation: 1) prioritized needs and 2) lessons learned, with subcategories project impact, facilitators, barriers and community participation. Community participation was assessed via spidergrams. Key findings were compared with triangulation protocols. Results: A total of 348 people with disability from 6 urban settings participated in the baseline survey, with a mean age of 37.6 years (SD 23.8). Out of these, 18 participated within the four Focus Group Discussions. Less than half of the survey participants were able to read and calculate (42.0%) and reported knowledge on health care routes (46.0%). Unemployment (87.9%) and inadequate housing (57.8%) were other prioritized needs across countries. Focus Group Discussions revealed needs within health, education, livelihood, social and empowerment domains. Participants highlighted positive project impact in work inclusion, self-esteem and ability for self-advocacy. Facilitators included individual leadership, community networks and previous reputation of participating organizations. Barriers against successful project implementation were inadequate contextualization, lack of resources and on-site support, mostly due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The overall level of community participation was high (mean score 4.0/5) with lower levels in Brazil (3.8/5) and Bolivia (3.2/5). Conclusion: People with disability still face significant needs. Community Based Inclusive Development can initiate positive changes, but adequate contextualization and on-site support should be assured. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Tackling poverty requires reconsideration of quantitative factors related to "who" is poor and by "how much" and qualitative factors addressing "what poverty means in these individuals' lives". Greater understanding is required concerning the types of access actually used by families in poverty in attempts to meet their basic needs. Poverty must be addressed based on the question: "Inequality of what?" It is in reflecting on the realities of such groups when their basic needs are not met that public policies can be improved and implemented with legitimate priorities. Objective: Describe coverage and access to public health, education and social assistance services and the related effects on the quality of life of families in extreme poverty. Methods: An exploratory mixed methods study was conducted applying Amartya Sen's "Basic Capability Equality" framework, with: 1) 27 interviews with managers and professionals from public services serving territories with extreme poverty; 2) Survey with a systematic proportionate stratified sample of 336 heads of households in extreme poverty from a total 2605 families. The resulting data was analyzed with thematic content analysis and descriptive statistics, respectively. Results: The managers and professionals described the lives of families in extreme poverty with phrases such as, "These people suffer. Sadness weighs on their lives!" and "Depression is the most common illness". Their precarious circumstances and inadequate access were cited as causes. Quality of life was considered bad or very bad by 41.4% of heads of households. A total income of less than one-third of the minimum wage was received by 56.9% of the sample. One or more people were unemployed in the family in 55.8% of cases. For 53.3% of heads of households, public services "did not meet any or few of their needs". The main social determinants of health were described as: alcohol and drugs (68.8%); lack of good health care (60.7%); and absence of income/work (37.5%). The following were identified as solutions to improve their quality of life: (1) health (40.5%); (2) education (37.8%); and (3) employment (44.6%). Conclusions: The social determinants of poverty and health must be addressed jointly through intersectoral public policies and egalitarian mechanisms that promote investment in social protection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]