Risk screening, emergency care, and lay concepts of complications during pregnancy in Chiapas, Mexico
Maternal morbidity and mortality are widespread in Chiapas, Mexico's southernmost state, as in many developing regions. Globally, the utility of three approaches to addressing such problems has been debated: (a) obstetric risk screening (i.e. screening women for risk during pregnancy and channeling those at risk to preventive care); (b) emergency obstetric care (i.e. identifying complications during pregnancy or birth and providing prompt effective treatment); and (c) combined risk screening and emergency care. Unaddressed to date in peer-reviewed journals are the lay perceptions of complications and risk that precede and incite the quest for obstetric care in Mexico. High incidence of maternal mortality in Chiapas, exacerbated by the predominantly rural, highly indigenous, geographically dispersed, and economically marginalized nature of the state's southern Border Region, prompted us to conduct 45 open-ended interviews with a convenience sample of women and their close relative/s, including indigenous and non-indigenous informants in urban and rural areas of four municipalities in this region. Interviews suggest that none of the three approaches is effective in this context, and we detail reasons why each approach has fallen short. Specific obstacles identified include that (1) many women do not access adequate prenatal screening care on a regular basis; (2) emergency obstetric care in this region is severely circumscribed; and (3) lay notions of pregnancy-related risk and complications contrast with official clinical criteria, such that neither clinical nor extra-clinical prenatal monitoring encompasses the entire range of physical and social risk factors and danger signs. Findings reported here center on a rich description of the latter: lay versus clinical criteria for risk of antepartum complication.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 66 (2008)
Issue (Month): 5 (March)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description|
|Order Information:|| Postal: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/supportfaq.cws_home/regional|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:66:y:2008:i:5:p:1057-1069. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei)
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.