Disability-Disaggregated Data Collection: Hospital-Based Application of the Washington Group Questions in an Eye Hospital in Paraguay

Manfred Mörchen, Olmedo Zambrano, Alexander Páez, Paola Salgado, Jason Penniecook, Andrea Brandt von Lindau and David Lewis
Additional contact information
Manfred Mörchen: Christoffel Blindenmission (CBM) International, Stubenwaldallee 5, 64625 Bensheim, Germany
Olmedo Zambrano: Christoffel Blindenmission (CBM) International, Stubenwaldallee 5, 64625 Bensheim, Germany
Alexander Páez: Fundaciόn Visiόn, Ingavi, Fernando de la Mora 8000, Paraguay
Paola Salgado: Fundaciόn Visiόn, Ingavi, Fernando de la Mora 8000, Paraguay
Jason Penniecook: Fundaciόn Visiόn, Ingavi, Fernando de la Mora 8000, Paraguay
Andrea Brandt von Lindau: Christoffel Blindenmission (CBM) International, Stubenwaldallee 5, 64625 Bensheim, Germany
David Lewis: CBM Australia, 56 Rutland Rd, Melbourne 3128, Australia

IJERPH, 2019, vol. 16, issue 17, 1-16

Abstract: Disability-disaggregated data are increasingly considered important to monitor progress in Universal Eye Health Care. Hospital-based data are still elusive because of the cultural ambiguities of the term disability, especially in under-resourced Health Information Systems in low-and middle-income countries. The aim of this study was to estimate the hospital-based rate of disability in patients presenting at an eye department of a rural hospital in Paraguay and to discuss implications for the management of access barriers. Therefore, we introduced two standardized sets of the Washington Group (WG) Questions as a pilot project. In total, 999 patients answered the self-report WG short set (WG-SS) questionnaire with six functional domains, and 501 of these patients answered an extended set, which included additional domains for “anxiety” and “depression” (WG-ES3). Overall, 27.7% (95% Confidence Interval (CI) 24.9–30.3) were categorized as having a disability. A total of 9.6% (95% CI 7.9–11.6) were categorized as having a disability because of communication difficulties, which was second only to visual difficulties. The odds ratio for disability for patients aged 70 years and older was 8.5 (95% CI 5.0–14.4) and for male patients, it was 0.83 (95% CI 0.62–1.1). Of those patients who answered the WG-ES3, 3.4% were categorized as having a disability because of being worried, nervous or anxious and 1.4% because of feeling depressed. An analysis of the questions of the “depression” domain was impeded by a high rate of measurement errors. The results of the different domains can now be used to inform the identification and mitigation of potential access barriers to eye health services for different types of impairments.

Keywords: inclusive eye health; disability; health information system; Washington Group (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2019
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/16/17/3085/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/16/17/3085/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:16:y:2019:i:17:p:3085-:d:260772

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().