Published in:
Open Access 01-12-2019 | Shock | Research article
Health shocks, care-seeking behaviour and coping strategies of extreme poor households in Bangladesh’s Chittagong Hill tracts
Published in: BMC Public Health | Issue 1/2019
Login to get accessAbstract
Background
How and whether health shocks, care-seeking behaviour and coping strategies are interlinked and influence households resilience to ill-health remains an under-researched subject in the context of Bangladesh. This study investigates whether and how health shocks, care-seeking processes and coping strategies interplay and impact the resilience of extremely poor adivasi (ethnic minority) households in the Chittagong Hill Tracts (CHT), Bangladesh.
Methods
Our analysis draws from qualitative data collected through a range of methods (see Additional file 1). We conducted 25 in-depth interviews (IDIs) of two adivasi communities targeted by an extreme-poverty alleviation programme, 11 key informant interviews (KIIs) with project personnel (community workers, field officers, project managers), community leaders, and healthcare providers, and 9 focus group discussions (FGDs) with community members. Data triangulation was performed to further validate the data, and a thematic analysis approach was used to analyze the data.
Results
Health shocks were a defining characteristic of households’ experiences of extreme poverty in the studied region. Care-seeking behaviours are influenced by an array of cultural and economic factors. Households adopt a range of coping strategies during the treatment or care-seeking process, which are often insufficient to allow households to maintain a stable economic status. This is largely due to the fact that healthcare costs are borne by the household, primarily through out-of-pocket payments. Households meet healthcare cost by selling their means of livelihoods, borrowing cash, and marketing livestock. This process erodes their wellbeing and hinders they attempt at achieving resilience, despite their involvement in an extreme poverty-alleviation programme.
Conclusions
Livelihood supports or asset-transfers alone are insufficient to improve household resilience in this context. Therefore, we argue that extreme poor households’ healthcare needs should be central to the design of poverty-alleviating intervention for them to contribute to foster resilience.