No abstract

BackgroundDisability rates increase with age. In 2012, Peruvian older adults (≥ 65 years) represented 9% of the population. Additionally, older population reported disabilities at about 5 times the rate of Peruvians between 36 and 64 years old, and 30% of older population lived in poverty. Peruvian seniors living in extreme poverty experience disabilities and the extent of their access to healthcare is unknown.ObjectiveThis study assesses associations between disability and access to healthcare among Peruvians older individuals living in extreme poverty.MethodsSecondary analysis of a national representative population based survey that utilizes information from Peru’s 2012 survey Health and Wellbeing in Older Adults (ESBAM), which includes older adults living in extreme poverty. We define disability in terms of the Activities of Daily Living (ADL disability) framework. Healthcare access was assessed as having any of Peru’s available health insurance schemes combined with preventive health services (vision assessment, influenza vaccination, blood pressure assessment, diabetes screening, and cholesterol assessment). Poisson robust regression models were used to evaluate the associations among relevant variables. Prevalence Ratios and 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) were reported.ResultsData from 3869 individuals (65 to 80 years old), of whom 1760 (45.5%) were females, were analyzed. The prevalence of ADL disability was 17.3% (95%CI: 16.0%-18.4%). In addition, more than 60% had never received any of the preventive measures evaluated, except for the blood pressure assessment. In the adjusted model, people with ADL disability had 63% less probability of having extensive insurance, compared to those without disability (p<0.05).ConclusionsThis study shows that this Peruvian older population living in extreme poverty has limited access to healthcare services. Although there was no consistent association between ADL disability and the healthcare access, there is an urgent need to reduce the inequitable access to healthcare of this poor Peruvian older population.

Since the turn of the millennium, conceptual and practice-oriented shi s in global health have increasingly given emphasis to health indicator production over research and interventions that emerge out of local social practices, environments and concerns. In this special issue of Anthropology in Action, we ask whether such globalised contexts allow for, recognise and suffi ciently value the research contributions of our discipline. We question how global health research, ostensibly inter-or multi-disciplinary, generates knowledge. We query 'notknowing' practices that inform and shape global health evidence as infl uenced by funders' and collaborators' expectations. The articles published here provide analyses of historical and ethnographic fi eld experiences that show how sidelining anthropological contributions results in poorer research outcomes for the public. Citing experiences in Latin America, Angola, Senegal, Nigeria and the domain of global health evaluation, the authors consider anthropology's roles in global health. AssumptionsWe do not reprise here debates about how anthropologists defi ne global health (for example, Janes and Corbe 2010; Kleinman 2010; and Nguyen 2016); neither do we make the reductive argument that anthropology brings value to global health primarily as a method for conducting formative research or evaluation; nor do we explicitly explore anthropology's long history of critical engagement with numbers and statistics (for example, Asad 1994; Erikson

No abstract