Search

According to the World Health Organization reports, nowadays burden of chronic kidney diseases (CKD) is well documented. The high prevalence of noncommunicable diseases (NCD) such as hypertension, diabetes, and obesity, which are the main causes of CKD, is a big concern in the world health scenario [1]. These NCD can progress slowly to end-stage renal disease (ESRD) and the low-middle income countries (LMIC) like Haiti are not left unscathed by this worldwide scourge. Several well-known public health issues prevalent in Haiti such as acute diarrheal infections, malaria, tuberculosis, cholera, and acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS), can also impair the function of the kidney. Dialysis, a form of renal replacement therapy (RRT), represents a life-saving therapy for all patients affected with impaired kidney. In Haiti, few patients have access to health insurance or disability financial support. Considering that seventy-two percent (72%) of Haitians live with less than USD 2 per day [2], survival with CKD can be quite stressful for them. Data on the weight of the dialysis and its management are scarce. Addressing the need for dialysis in Haiti is an important component in decision-making and planning processes in the health sector. This paper is intended to bring forth discussion on the use of this type of renal replacement therapy in Haiti: the past, the present, and the challenges it presents. We will also make some recommendations in order to manage this serious problem.

Background: This study examines contraception choices among Hispanic and non-Hispanic girls, to determine if there are differences when the barrier of cost is removed by facilitating enrollment in a Title X Family Planning Program. Methods: Charts of adolescent females aged 13–19 years, seen for the first time at a university hospital clinic from January 1, 2005 to December 31, 2007, were reviewed. Access to contraception was facilitated by enrollment in the Title X Family Planning Program. Patients were categorized as public insurance if they had Medicaid or Child/Family Health Plus or chose to enroll in the Title X program. Results: Among the 666 eligible patients, 27% were Hispanic, with a mean age of 14.9 years. At least 20% had used one form of contraception before their first clinic visit. About one-third of the youth were enrolled in the Title X Family Planning Program, with no statistical difference between Hispanic and non-Hispanic youth. Three hundred and ninety subjects (58%) chose contraception during their visit. Hispanic subjects, who represented 32% of the group, were more likely to choose condoms and oral contraceptive pills compared to non-Hispanic subjects. The privately insured adolescents chose condoms less often than the publicly insured adolescents, and this was true regardless of ethnicity. Conclusion: There are significant differences in contraception choices between Hispanic and non-Hispanic youth. The Title X Family Planning Program allowed young women to make independent choices. Adolescents may benefit from further improvements in culturally sensitive family planning programs.