12
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
3 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Access to healthcare for people with disabilities in South Africa: Bad at any time, worse during COVID-19?

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          People with disabilities, especially those living in low- and middle-income countries, experience significant challenges in accessing healthcare services and support. At times of disasters and emergencies, people with disabilities are further marginalised and excluded. During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, many people with disabilities are unable to access healthcare facilities, receive therapeutic interventions or rehabilitation, or gain access to medication. Of those who are able to access facilities, many experience challenges, and at times direct discrimination, accessing life-saving treatment such as intensive care unit admission and ventilator support. In addition, research has shown that people with disabilities are at higher risk of contracting the virus because of factors that include the need for interpersonal caregivers and living in residential facilities. We explore some of the challenges that people with disabilities residing in South Africa currently experience in relation to accessing healthcare facilities.

          Related collections

          Most cited references45

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          COVID-19 exacerbating inequalities in the US

          COVID-19 does not affect everyone equally. In the US, it is exposing inequities in the health system. Aaron van Dorn, Rebecca E Cooney, and Miriam L Sabin report from New York. In the US, New York City has so far borne the brunt of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, with the highest reported number of cases and the highest death toll in the country. The first COVID-19 case in the city was reported on March 1, but community transmission was firmly established on March 7. As of April 14, New York State has tested nearly half a million people, among whom 195 031 have tested positive. In New York City alone, 106 763 people have tested positive and 7349 have died. “New York is the canary in the coal mine. What happens to New York is going to wind up happening to California, and Washington State and Illinois. It's just a matter of time”, said New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, while asking for greater federal assistance. The response within New York City, known for its historically strong public health responses, has been to ramp up for the surge, but also to tailor the approach to address some of the most basic touchpoints that could worsen health outcomes, including providing three meals a day to all New York residents in need. Oxiris Barbot, commissioner of the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene stated, “Our primary focus at this moment has to be on keeping our city's communities safe. This means supporting the public hospitals with supplies; connecting underserved people to free access to care; and delivering health guidance through the trusted voices of community organizations. The COVID-19 pandemic will come to an end eventually, but what is needed afterward is a renewed focus to ensure that health is not a byproduct of privilege. Public health has a fundamental role to play in shaping our future to be more just and equitable.” Confirming existing disparities, within New York City and other urban centres, African American and other communities of colour have been especially affected by the COVID-10 pandemic. Across the country, deaths due to COVID-19 are disproportionately high among African Americans compared with the population overall. In Milwaukee, WI, three quarters of all COVID-19 related deaths are African American, and in St Louis, MO, all but three people who have died as a result of COVID-19 were African American. According to Sharrelle Barber of Drexel University Dornsife School of Public Health (Philadelphia, PA, USA), the pre-existing racial and health inequalities already present in US society are being exacerbated by the pandemic. “Black communities, Latino communities, immigrant communities, Native American communities—we're going to bear the disproportionate brunt of the reckless actions of a government that did not take the proper precautions to mitigate the spread of this disease”, Barber said. “And that's going to be overlaid on top of the existing racial inequalities.” Part of the disproportionate impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on communities of colour has been structural factors that prevent those communities from practicing social distancing. Minority populations in the US disproportionally make up “essential workers” such as retail grocery workers, public transit employees, and health-care workers and custodial staff. “These front-line workers, disproportionately black and brown, then are typically a part of residentially segregated communities”, said Barber. “They don't have that privilege of quote unquote ‘staying at home’, connecting those individuals to the communities they are likely to be a part of because of this legacy of residential segregation, or structural racism in our major cities and most cities in the United States.” The negative consequences of health disparities for people who live in rural areas in the US were already a problem before the pandemic. Underserved African Americans face higher HIV incidence and greater maternal and infant mortality rates. Undocumented Latino communities working in rural industries such as farming, poultry, and meat production often have no health insurance. Poor white communities have been badly hit by the opioid crisis and across rural areas, especially in the southern states, high rates of non-communicable diseases are driven by conditions such as obesity. With higher COVID-19 mortality among those with underlying health conditions, these areas could be hit hard. © 2020 Spencer Platt/Getty Images 2020 Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active. 14 US states (mostly in the south and the Plains) have refused to accept the Affordable Care Act Medicaid expansion, leaving millions of the poorest and sickest Americans without access to health care, with the added effect of leaving many regional and local hospitals across the US closed or in danger of closing because of the high cost of medical care and a high proportion of rural uninsured and underinsured people. People with COVID-19 in those states will have poor access to the kind of emergency and intensive care they will need. Native American populations also have disproportionately higher levels of underlying conditions, such as heart disease and diabetes, that would make them particularly at risk of complications from COVID-19. Health care for Native American communities has a unique place in the US. As part of treaty obligations owed by the US government to tribal groups, the Indian Health Service (IHS) provides direct point of care health care for the 2·6 million Native Americans living on tribal reservations. According to the IHS, there are currently 985 confirmed cases of COVID-19 on tribal reservations, and 536 cases in the Navajo Nation alone (the largest reservation). However, the IHS's ability to respond to the crisis might be limited: according to according to Kevin Allis, Chief Executive Officer of the National Congress of American Indians, the largest Native American advocacy organisation, the IHS has only 1257 hospital beds and 36 intensive care units, and many people covered by the IHS are hours away from the nearest IHS facility. The IHS also does not cover care from external providers. Although there is a provision of the CARES Act stimulus bill that is intended to cover those costs, it is unclear how effective it would be if someone covered by the IHS is transferred to a non-IHS facility. © 2020 Reuters/Kevin Lamarque 2020 Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active. The CARES Act also included US$8 billion to supplement the health and economies of Native Americans and Alaska Natives. Even that number was an increase from what President Donald Trump's administration originally wanted. “We knew the White House wanted to give us nothing”, Allis said. “And senate Republicans were okay with a billion and it fine-tuned its way to $8 billion.” But the deep history of injustice by the US government towards these people means that the US response will be looked on with suspicion. At the national level, the response has varied widely by state, with many states that voted for Trump in 2016—notably Florida, Texas, and Georgia—responding to the emerging pandemic later and with more lax measures. Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, a Republican Trump ally, was slow to implement social-distancing measures and close non-essential businesses, and Georgia Governor Brian Kemp ordered beaches closed by local authorities to be reopened on April 3. However, the trend has not been universal: in Ohio, Republican Governor Mike DeWine was swift in issuing orders to shut non-essential businesses and in responding to the crisis. The federal response has also been overtly political. States with governors that Trump sees as political allies (such as Florida), have received the full measure of requested personal protective equipment from the federal stockpile, while states with governors whom Trump identifies as political enemies (such as New York's Cuomo, Oregon's Jay Inslee, and Michigan's Gretchen Whitmer, all Democrats) have received only a fraction of their requests. Trump has also publicly attacked the responses of those governors on Twitter and during his daily briefings. In distributing funds made available by the CARES Act, Trump also appears to be playing favourites: New York received only a fraction of the $30 billion hospital relief funds from the bill ($12 000 per patient), while other states much more lightly affected received more ($300 000 per patient in Montana and Nebraska, and more than $470 000 per patient in West Virginia, all states that voted for Trump in 2016). Although the numbers of reported cases seem to be levelling off in New York City and other urban areas, perhaps evidence that social-distancing measures are beginning to have an effect, emerging morbidity and mortality data have already clearly demonstrated what many have feared: a pandemic in which the brunt of the effects fall on already vulnerable US populations, and in which the deeply rooted social, racial, and economic health disparities in the country have been laid bare.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found

            A Framework for Rationing Ventilators and Critical Care Beds During the COVID-19 Pandemic

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Why inequality could spread COVID-19

              Pandemics rarely affect all people in a uniform way. The Black Death in the 14th century reduced the global population by a third, with the highest number of deaths observed among the poorest populations. 1 Densely populated with malnourished and overworked peasants, medieval Europe was a fertile breeding ground for the bubonic plague. Seven centuries on—with a global gross domestic product of almost US$100 trillion—is our world adequately resourced to prevent another pandemic? 2 Current evidence from the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic would suggest otherwise. Estimates indicate that COVID-19 could cost the world more than $10 trillion, 3 although considerable uncertainty exists with regard to the reach of the virus and the efficacy of the policy response. For each percentage point reduction in the global economy, more than 10 million people are plunged into poverty worldwide. 3 Considering that the poorest populations are more likely to have chronic conditions, this puts them at higher risk of COVID-19-associated mortality. Since the pandemic has perpetuated an economic crisis, unemployment rates will rise substantially and weakened welfare safety nets further threaten health and social insecurity. Working should never come at the expense of an individual's health nor to public health. In the USA, instances of unexpected medical billings for uninsured patients treated for COVID-19 and carriers continuing to work for fear of redundancy have already been documented. 4 Despite employment safeguards recently being passed into law in some high-income countries, such as the UK and the USA, low-income groups are wary of these assurances since they have experience of long-standing difficulties navigating complex benefits systems, 4 and many workers (including the self-employed) can be omitted from such contingency plans. The implications of inadequate financial protections for low-wage workers are more evident in countries with higher levels of extreme poverty, such as India. In recent pandemics, such as the Middle East respiratory syndrome, doctors were vectors of disease transmission due to inadequate testing and personal protective equipment. 5 History seems to be repeating itself, with clinicians comprising more than a tenth of all COVID-19 cases in Spain and Italy. With a projected global shortage of 15 million health-care workers by 2030, governments have left essential personnel exposed in this time of need. Poor populations lacking access to health services in normal circumstances are left most vulnerable during times of crisis. Misinformation and miscommunication disproportionally affect individuals with less access to information channels, who are thus more likely to ignore government health warnings. 6 With the introduction of physical distancing measures, household internet coverage should be made ubiquitous. The inequitable response to COVID-19 is already evident. Healthy life expectancy and mortality rates have historically been markedly disproportionate between the richest and poorest populations. The full effects of COVID-19 are yet to be seen, while the disease begins to spread across the most fragile settings, including conflict zones, prisons, and refugee camps. As the global economy plunges deeper into an economic crisis and government bailout programmes continue to prioritise industry, scarce resources and funding allocation decisions must aim to reduce inequities rather than exacerbate them.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                S Afr Fam Pract (2004)
                S Afr Fam Pract (2004)
                SAFP
                South African Family Practice
                AOSIS
                2078-6190
                2078-6204
                19 July 2021
                2021
                : 63
                : 1
                : 5226
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Interdisciplinary Centre for Sports Science and Development, Faculty of Community and Health Sciences, University of the Western Cape, Cape Town, South Africa
                [2 ]Department of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, Faculty of Human Sciences, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa
                [3 ]Department of Psychology, Faculty of Arts, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, South Africa
                Author notes
                Corresponding author: Emma McKinney, emma@ 123456disabilityincluded.co.za
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7483-5463
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1067-8934
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1741-5897
                Article
                SAFP-63-5226
                10.4102/safp.v63i1.5226
                8335793
                34342484
                bb4fc138-0158-4ead-b99a-f57618042402
                © 2021. The Authors

                Licensee: AOSIS. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution License.

                History
                : 16 September 2020
                : 24 May 2021
                Categories
                Open Forum

                disability,healthcare access,equity,discrimination,south africa,covid-19,health systems research,human rights

                Comments

                Comment on this article