RESUMO
RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: South Asian (SA) Canadians with kidney failure have a 50%-77% lower likelihood of kidney transplant and are less likely to identify potential living donors (LDs). This study aimed to identify health system-, patient-, and community-level barriers and facilitators for accessing LD kidney transplantation in the SA community to inform the development of health system- and community-level interventions to address barriers. STUDY DESIGN: Qualitative study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: 20 SA recipients of an LD or deceased-donor kidney transplant, 10 SA LDs, and 41 general SA community members. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: In-depth multilingual interviews were conducted with recipients and LDs. Gender-, language-, and age-stratified focus groups were conducted with general SA community members. Summative content analysis was used to analyze the data. RESULTS: Hesitancy in approaching potential donors, fear about the health of potential LDs, information gaps, language barriers, and challenges evaluating out-of-country donors were highlighted as significant barriers by recipients, and financial concerns and information gaps were identified by donors. Cultural barriers in the SA community were highlighted by donors, recipients, and community members as critical factors when considering donation and transplant; women and elderly SA Canadians highlighted nuanced challenges. Participants reported generally a favorable perception of their health care teams, citing SA representation in the teams as important to providing culturally and linguistically sensitive care. LIMITATIONS: Limited geographic, race, and cultural representation and reliance on virtual data collection. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights several culturally relevant barriers to donation and transplant that are potentially modifiable through patient-, health system-, and community-focused engagement and education.
Assuntos
Transplante de Rim , Doadores Vivos , Adulto , Idoso , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Adulto Jovem , Canadá , Barreiras de Comunicação , Grupos Focais , Acessibilidade aos Serviços de Saúde , Falência Renal Crônica/cirurgia , Falência Renal Crônica/etnologia , Falência Renal Crônica/terapia , Pesquisa Qualitativa , Obtenção de Tecidos e Órgãos , População do Sul da ÁsiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Health system policies and programs that reduce health inequities and improve health outcomes are essential to address unjust social gradients in health. Prioritization of health equity is fundamental to addressing health inequities but challenging to enact in health systems. Strategies are needed to support effective prioritization of health equity. METHODS: Following provincial policy recommendations to apply a health equity lens in all public health programs, we examined health equity prioritization within British Columbia health authorities during early implementation. We conducted semi-structured qualitative interviews and focus groups with 55 senior executives, public health directors, regional directors, and medical health officers from six health authorities and the Ministry of Health. We used an inductive constant comparative approach to analysis guided by complexity theory to determine critical elements for prioritization. RESULTS: We identified seven critical elements necessary for two fundamental shifts within health systems. 1) Prioritization through informal organization includes creating a systems value for health equity and engaging health equity champions. 2) Prioritization through formal organization requires explicit naming of health equity as a priority, designating resources for health equity, requiring health equity in decision making, building capacity and competency, and coordinating a comprehensive approach across levels of the health system and government. CONCLUSIONS: Although creating a shared value for health equity is essential, health equity - underpinned by social justice - needs to be embedded at the structural level to support effective prioritization. Prioritization within government and ministries is necessary to facilitate prioritization at other levels. All levels within health systems should be accountable for explicitly including health equity in strategic plans and goals. Dedicated resources are needed for health equity initiatives including adequate resourcing of public health infrastructure, training, and hiring of staff with equity expertise to develop competencies and system capacity.
Assuntos
Atenção à Saúde/organização & administração , Equidade em Saúde , Prioridades em Saúde , Colúmbia Britânica , Grupos Focais , Humanos , Pesquisa QualitativaRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Reducing health inequities is a stated goal of health systems worldwide. There is widespread commitment to health equity among public health leaders and calls for reorientation of health systems towards health equity. As part of the Equity Lens in Public Health (ELPH) program of research, public health decision makers and researchers in British Columbia collaborated to study the application of a health equity lens in a time of health system renewal. We drew on intersectionality, complexity and critical social justice theories to understand how participants construct health equity and apply a health equity lens as part of public health renewal. METHODS: 15 focus groups and 16 individual semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with 55 health system leaders. Data were analyzed using constant comparative analysis to explore how health equity was constructed in relation to understandings and actions. RESULTS: Four main themes were identified in terms of how health care leaders construct health equity and actions to reduce health inequities: (1) population health, (2) determinants of health, and (3) accessibility and (4) challenges of health equity talk. The first three aspects of health equity talk reflect different understandings of health equity rooted in vulnerability (individual versus structural), determinants of health (material versus social determinants), and appropriate health system responses (targeted versus universal responses). Participants identified that talking about health equity in the health care system, either inside or outside of public health, is a 'challenging conversation' because health equity is understood in diverse ways and there is little guidance available to apply a health equity lens. CONCLUSIONS: These findings reflect the importance of creating a shared understanding of health equity within public health systems, and providing guidance and clarity as to the meaning and application of a health equity lens. A health equity lens for public health should capture both the production and distribution of health inequities and link to social justice to inform action.