REPORT
Reporting on post-Cairo changes
Quality of care in
laparoscopic sterilisation camps
Vimala
Ramachandran
Laparoscopic sterilisation has been made available in India since the
1970s. This procedure requires high skill on the part of the surgeon and can be
performed as an outpatient procedure. In the absence of reliable spacing
methods, it is believed that women find this method convenient as it takes
little time and also leaves a very small physical scar. Since the early 1980s,
this method of female sterilisation has become the mainstay of India’s family
planning programme. It is provided in camps as well as in health centres.
Keeping in view the need to maintain aseptic procedures and safeguard
patients from hepatitis and HIV infection, the government issued guidelines
relating to the cleaning and use of laparoscopes. According to the guidelines,
laparoscopes are to be washed and dried after each operation and immersed in
Cidex solution for at least 30 minutes. This implies that a surgeon using two
laparoscopes can perform a maximum of 25 operations in one working day of eight
hours. (source: letter from ministry of health and family welfare dated
September 23, 1993, quoted in Ramanathan et al in Reproductive Health
Matters
In the post-Cairo period, under the new RCH approach, the
government issued guidelines with regard to client screening - taking medical
history, basic physical examination and laboratory examination for haemoglobin,
blood sugar and albumin. Patients are also expected to be given clear pre- and
post-operative instructions. The operation is to be followed by strict
monitoring for three hours followed by three visits by the ANM at stipulated
intervals.
In the last three years, researchers have observed sterilisation camps
in many states. Some common observations made by them General infrastructure
facilities are very poor. There is little drinking water or water for medical
teams to wash their hands. Toilet facilities are poor.
Women queue up, and wait up to even four hours.
Women are huddled
together in makeshift tents with poor hygiene and almost no privacy.
Few
pelvic examinations are done. By and large doctors do not take medical
histories. (There were cases reported where women were not even asked if they
had undergone an abortion in the last 24 hours. Ramanathan et al report that
given the pressure of work, women go for an abortion and come directly to a
sterilisation camp. Similar cases have also been observed in Rajasthan.)
Urine samples are tested in most of the camps, primarily to test for
pregnancy.
Women are asked to walk up to the operation table, lie down head
downwards on benches with some help from female or even male workers.
Women are prepared for the operation (swabbed and cleaned, local
anaesthesia given, tubes inserted, abdomen inflated) on the table and again
there is little privacy.
Innumerable operations are performed in one day. In most cases, the
laparoscope is not immersed in Cidex solution. Doctors do not change their
gloves after each operation; the rubber sheet used on the operation table is
also not changed.
Women are helped down from the table and asked to walk or
are carried to a post- operative room/ tent. Hygiene is poor and again, there is
little privacy. They are attended to by ANMs/ staff nurses. Unless there is
evidence of a complication women do not see the doctor again.
The women are not counselled about post-operative care and symptoms of
complications. There is hardly any verbal communication between the women and
the nurses / ANMs. They are given antibiotic tablets and asked to go home.
After resting a while, women walk back to take buses/ jeeps/ tempos to reach
home.
Follow-up care is entrusted to ANMs. In some states, women have
reported that ANMs visit them three times in quick succession - in two or three
days.
The most worrisome aspect is the attitude of service providers. They
treat the clients with little regard for human dignity. Unfortunately, even
women doctors do not treat their clients differently.
While there may be
some variations across states, the above description is quite representative of
what happens in sterilisation camps. During discussions with administrators and
technical people in the government, most agreed that the situation in the camps
was far from desirable, admitting that it was a dehumanizing experience - not
only for the clients but even for sensitive service providers. The following
reasons were cited by administrators in many states as factors responsible for
this situation
Camps are normally organised between December and March each year.
Funds are transferred in the last quarter of the financial year - putting
pressure on the health delivery system to pack a year’s work in three months.
If laparoscopic sterilisation is made available on one day of the week
in a routine manner, such poor service delivery can be avoided. Unfortunately,
this is not possible (at least in the more backward states) because trained
surgeons are not available in every district There are many districts in UP,
Rajasthan and MP where there is not even one lady doctor or a trained surgeon.
Therefore, the state government has little option but to organise camps.
The
health delivery system has never laid any importance on provider client
interaction. This attitude is not typical of the health care system alone; it is
the same in all public sector services.
Many administrators and service providers believe women are the
culprits - that they produce too many children. This is a mind set that will
take many years to change.
Unfortunately, even in the post Cairo period where quality is given so
much importance, no one is looking at quality of care in sterilisation camps.
It is more than apparent that there is a huge gap between policy- level
intentions and government of India guidelines and the ground reality. While
officers in the government of India acknowledge the need to improve quality of
care, operationalising it is bound to be an uphill task.
References :
The observations made in this
article have been drawn from: Papers presented at the National Workshop on
Quality of Services in the Indian Family Welfare programme, May 24- 26, 2997,
Bangalore.
HealthWatch consultation reports, 1995- 97 and 1998- 99.
Ramanathan et al, ‘Quality of care in laparoscopic sterilisation camps:
observations from Kerala, India’.
Reproductive health matters, November
1995.
In-service training manual of PHC medical officers, FP Quality of
care, Department of Family Welfare, Government of Himachal Pradesh, 1995.
Personal communication with the director, medicine and health, government of
Rajasthan, Jaipur.
Draft project document prepared for the proposed SIDA-
assisted RCH initiative in seven districts of Rajasthan, Indian Institute of
Health Management Research, Jaipur, March 1998.
Mavlakar Dilip: Quality of
family planning in India: a review of public and private sector. Indian
Institute of Management, Ahmedabad, January 1996.
Vimla Ramachandran, Indian
Institute of Health Management Research, Jaipur.
Population control raises hackles
A bill introduced in
the Delhi State Assembly seeks to deny ration cards to families exceeding the
two-child norm. It also demands that families which exceed the norm be punished
by denial of bank loans, enrollment in government housing schemes and
cooperative societies and the parents lose the right to contest civic body
elections. “The bill is wholly misconceived, unconstitutional and discriminatory
and also objectionably elitist in its assertions,” said Suhasini Ali, former
member of Parliament and activist with the All India Democratic Women’s
Association. The bill flies in the face of commitments by India to agreements at
the International Conference on Population and Development at Cairo in 1994 and
the Fourth World Conference on Women in Beijing the next year. Since then, on
paper, the country’s family welfare programmes have increased funding for
reproductive health and tried to expand the range of services while trying to
limit population size. But according to the Voluntary Health Association of
India (VHAI), the new policy directives have failed to reach the grassroots
level. Says VHAI’s Mira Shiva, “the government must get out of the sterilisation
trap of which the Department of Family Welfare is itself the main victim.”
According to Shiva, doing away with the department would be a good beginning.
According to Shiva, the infant mortality rate in India at 74 per thousand is
still too high to expect people to take the two- child norm seriously. “There is
no question of a poor woman agreeing to have only two children when she knows
that both of them may die of some disease or the other,” she said. “Basic
survival, potable water, proper sanitation and affordable health care have to be
the crux of any population policy.”
From: Inter Press Service, July
13, 1999