Epidemiology and Biostatistics Unit, Institute of Public Health, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany.
Int J Health Geogr. 2014 Jun 26;13:25. doi: 10.1186/1476-072X-13-25.
Access to skilled attendance at childbirth is crucial to reduce maternal and newborn mortality. Several different measures of geographic access are used concurrently in public health research, with the assumption that sophisticated methods are generally better. Most of the evidence for this assumption comes from methodological comparisons in high-income countries. We compare different measures of travel impedance in a case study in Ghana's Brong Ahafo region to determine if straight-line distance can be an adequate proxy for access to delivery care in certain low- and middle-income country (LMIC) settings.
We created a geospatial database, mapping population location in both compounds and village centroids, service locations for all health facilities offering delivery care, land-cover and a detailed road network. Six different measures were used to calculate travel impedance to health facilities (straight-line distance, network distance, network travel time and raster travel time, the latter two both mechanized and non-mechanized). The measures were compared using Spearman rank correlation coefficients, absolute differences, and the percentage of the same facilities identified as closest. We used logistic regression with robust standard errors to model the association of the different measures with health facility use for delivery in 9,306 births.
Non-mechanized measures were highly correlated with each other, and identified the same facilities as closest for approximately 80% of villages. Measures calculated from compounds identified the same closest facility as measures from village centroids for over 85% of births. For 90% of births, the aggregation error from using village centroids instead of compound locations was less than 35 minutes and less than 1.12 km. All non-mechanized measures showed an inverse association with facility use of similar magnitude, an approximately 67% reduction in odds of facility delivery per standard deviation increase in each measure (OR = 0.33).
Different data models and population locations produced comparable results in our case study, thus demonstrating that straight-line distance can be reasonably used as a proxy for potential spatial access in certain LMIC settings. The cost of obtaining individually geocoded population location and sophisticated measures of travel impedance should be weighed against the gain in accuracy.
获得熟练的分娩护理是降低母婴死亡率的关键。在公共卫生研究中,同时使用了几种不同的地理可达性衡量标准,假设复杂的方法通常更好。这一假设的大部分证据来自高收入国家的方法比较。我们在加纳布隆阿哈福地区的案例研究中比较了不同的旅行障碍衡量标准,以确定在某些中低收入国家(LMIC)环境中,直线距离是否可以作为获得分娩护理的充分替代指标。
我们创建了一个地理空间数据库,绘制了化合物和村庄中心的人口位置、提供分娩护理的所有卫生设施的服务位置、土地覆盖和详细的道路网络。使用六种不同的方法来计算到卫生设施的旅行障碍(直线距离、网络距离、网络旅行时间和栅格旅行时间,后两者均为机械化和非机械化)。使用 Spearman 秩相关系数、绝对差异和识别为最近的相同设施的百分比来比较这些措施。我们使用稳健标准误差的逻辑回归来模型化不同措施与 9306 例分娩中使用卫生设施的关联。
非机械化措施彼此高度相关,并且大约 80%的村庄识别出相同的最近设施。从村庄中心计算的措施与从化合物位置计算的措施对于超过 85%的分娩识别出相同的最近设施。对于 90%的分娩,使用村庄中心而不是化合物位置的聚合误差小于 35 分钟且小于 1.12 公里。所有非机械化措施都显示出与设施使用的负相关关系,每个措施的标准偏差增加一个标准差,设施分娩的几率大约降低 67%(OR=0.33)。
在我们的案例研究中,不同的数据模型和人口位置产生了可比的结果,因此证明在某些 LMIC 环境中,直线距离可以作为潜在空间可达性的合理替代指标。应权衡获得单独地理编码的人口位置和复杂的旅行障碍衡量标准的成本与准确性的提高。