Exploring ethics in the implementation of the Community Health Worker programmes in India.

The public health machinery in India is largely driven by the frontline community health workers (CHWs), namely the Accredited Social Health Activists (ASHAs), Auxiliary Nurse Midwives (ANMs), Anganwadi Workers (AWWs) and other multipurpose health workers. They play a vital role as intermediaries between the community and the health system. The ANMs perform important tasks such as spreading health promotion messages, supporting behavioural change, surveillance of diseases, delivery of maternal and child health services at the doorsteps of beneficiaries, prevention of common minor ailments and other public health tasks, as and when the need arises [1]. The ASHAs are trained female health workers who mobilise people to utilise health services and also provide basic primary healthcare.

Faith healing and faith in healing.

Sarkar and Seshadri have presented an interesting paper in this issue on the ethical approach that a physician should take when faced with requests for faith healing (1). The paper describes four approaches that the physician can take. These are rejecting the request, keeping oneself detached from the issue, endorsing the request and trying to understand the practices concerned so as to make a reasoned decision. This commentary attempts to explore the issue of faith healing further, from the point of view of clinical care. It shall discuss five important dimensions which can supplement the arguments by Sarkar and Seshadri. These are the concepts of faith, spirituality and religion and faith healing; the difference between cure and healing; patient-centred care; the various factors influencing a doctor's response to requests for faith healing; and finally, the ethical issues to be considered while making a decision. Before launching into the discussion, it should be made clear that this commentary refers mainly to those faith healing practices which are not overtly harmful, such as prayers, and wearing rings and amulets.

Determinants of postpartum anemia among women from a rural population in southern India.

BACKGROUND: Even though the problem of anemia during pregnancy has been adequately emphasized, very little attention has been paid to postpartum anemia. The objective of the current study was to estimate the mean change in maternal hemoglobin from 36 weeks' gestation to 6 weeks postpartum and to identify the factors associated with anemia during the postpartum period among women in a rural development block in Tamil Nadu, India. METHODS: Ninety-three pregnant women were interviewed using a structured questionnaire at 36 weeks' gestation and then at 2 and 6 weeks postpartum. Blood samples were collected from the participants at 36 weeks' gestation and at 6 weeks postpartum. Paired t-tests assessing the difference in mean hemoglobin prepartum and postpartum, univariate analysis, and multiple logistic regression to identify factors associated with postpartum anemia were done using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences version 12 for Microsoft Windows software. RESULTS: The proportion of study subjects who were anemic (hemoglobin <11 g/dL) at 36 weeks' gestation was 26.8% and at 6 weeks postpartum was 47.3% (hemoglobin <12 g/dL). The mean hemoglobin at 36-38 weeks' gestation was 11.70±1.43 g/dL and at 6 weeks postpartum was 12.10±1.27 g/dL. Anemia at 36 weeks' gestation (odds ratio [OR] 10.47, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.37-42.34), heavy blood loss perceived by the mother during delivery (OR 12.91, 95% CI 2.01-61.25), younger maternal age (<21 years, OR 2.45, 95% CI 1.28-23.86), and inadequate iron supplementation during the postpartum period (OR 3.53, 95% CI 1.18-11.37) were identified as significant factors associated with anemia at 6 weeks postpartum. CONCLUSION: Anemia during the third trimester of pregnancy, heavy bleeding perceived by the mother during delivery, younger maternal age, and inadequate iron supplementation during the postpartum period were associated with postpartum anemia.

Mainstreaming AYUSH: an ethical analysis.

The National Rural Health Mission has stated as one of its key mandates the mainstreaming of the Ayurveda, Yoga, Naturopathy, Unani, Siddha and Homeopathy (AYUSH) systems in order to help solve the human resource shortage in Indian healthcare. This has been planned at the primary level by providing training to AYUSH practitioners on primary care and national health programmes; at the secondary level by establishing departments of AYUSH in the district and taluka level hospitals; and at the tertiary level  by establishing AYUSH centres of excellence as referral centres, and research, development and supervision points. The practical challenges to be considered include a gross divergence in the basic philosophy of practice; disparities in approach to specific clinical conditions; differences in their normative approach in decision making; an unclear policy for cross referral and problems of cross practice that could potentially rise in this condition. Mainstreaming of AYUSH into the existing public health system can have certain ethical implications: not doing good by failing to concentrate on the community value judgments about AYUSH; doing harm by a confusing plurality in approach and unhealthy segregation of practices without healthy dialogue between practitioners of either system; not disclosing which type of practitioners (AYUSH or allopathy) the patient is seeing; lack of proper public accountability mechanisms at the primary care and grassroots levels; and, finally, lack of social justice. These ethical issues have to be considered while mainstreaming AYUSH.