Emerging Lingo-Cultural Inequality in Infant Autopsy in Quebec, Canada

  • Nathalie Auger
  • Marianne Bilodeau-Bertrand
  • André Costopoulos
Original Paper
  • 5 Downloads

Abstract

We investigated trends in infant autopsy for Francophones and Anglophones in Quebec, Canada. Using death certificates, we extracted 8214 infant deaths between 1989 and 2013. We computed rates of non-autopsy by language, socioeconomic disadvantage, age at death, and period. Using Kitagawa’s method, we decomposed non-autopsy rates over time for both language groups. Infant non-autopsy rates increased from 38.6 to 56.2 per 100 for Francophones, and from 41.2 to 57.2 per 100 for Anglophones, between 1989–1995 and 2008–2013. Trends in English-speakers were driven by socioeconomically disadvantaged Anglophones, and were accelerated by a larger proportion of deaths in this group over time. For French-speakers, rates increased in all socioeconomic groups. The increase in non-autopsy rates was larger at early neonatal ages for both languages. These findings suggest that disadvantaged Anglophones are less likely to use infant autopsy over time, and that rates can be improved by targeting early neonatal deaths.

Keywords

Autopsy Cultural deprivation Infant death Language Socioeconomic factors 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by Health Canada via the McGill Training and Retention of Health Professionals Project; and a Fonds de recherche du Québec-Santé career award (34695).

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

All authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Adappa R, Paranjothy S, Roberts Z, Cartlidge PH. Perinatal and infant autopsy. Arch Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2007;92:F49–F50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Becher JC, Laing IA, Keeling JW, McIntosh N. Restoring high neonatal autopsy rates. Lancet. 2004;364:2019–20.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gordijn SJ, Erwich JJ, Khong TY. The perinatal autopsy: pertinent issues in multicultural Western Europe. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2007;132:3–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kumar P, Angst DB, Taxy J, Mangurten HH. Neonatal autopsies: a 10-year experience. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2000;154:38–42.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gordijn SJ, Erwich JJ, Khong TY. Value of the perinatal autopsy: critique. Pediatr Dev Pathol. 2002;5:480–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chichester M. Requesting perinatal autopsy: multicultural considerations. MCN Am J Matern Child Nurs. 2007;32:81–6 (quiz 87–88).CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kang X, Cos T, Guizani M, Cannie MM, Segers V, Jani JC. Parental acceptance of minimally invasive fetal and neonatal autopsy compared with conventional autopsy. Prenat Diagn. 2014;34:1106–10.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Killeen OG, Burke C, Devaney D, Clarke TA. The value of the perinatal and neonatal autopsy. Ir Med J. 2004;97:241–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ben-Sasi K, Chitty LS, Franck LS, Thayyil S, Judge-Kronis L, Taylor AM, Sebire NJ. Acceptability of a minimally invasive perinatal/paediatric autopsy: healthcare professionals’ views and implications for practice. Prenat Diagn. 2013;33:307–12.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Villadsen SF, Mortensen LH, Andersen AM. Ethnic disparity in stillbirth and infant mortality in Denmark 1981–2003. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2009;63:106–12.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Spong CY, Iams J, Goldenberg R, Hauck FR, Willinger M. Disparities in perinatal medicine: preterm birth, stillbirth, and infant mortality. Obstet Gynecol. 2011;117:948–55.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ford CL, Harawa NT. A new conceptualization of ethnicity for social epidemiologic and health equity research. Soc Sci Med. 2010;71:251–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Corbeil J-P, Chavez B, Pereira D. Portrait of official-language minorities in Canada: anglophones in Quebec. Catalogue 89-642- X, No. 002. Ottawa: Statistics Canada. http://www.deslibris.ca/ID/228980 (2010). Accessed 6 Nov 2017.
  14. 14.
    Auger N, Park AL, Harper S. Francophone and anglophone perinatal health: temporal and regional inequalities in a Canadian setting, 1981–2008. Int J Public Health. 2012;57:925–34.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Auger N, Park AL, Daniel M. Contribution of local area deprivation to cultural-linguistic inequalities in foetal growth restriction: trends over time in a Canadian metropolitan centre. Health Place. 2013;22:38–47.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Auger N, Daniel M, Mortensen L, Toa-Lou C, Costopoulos A. Stillbirth in an anglophone minority of Canada. Int J Public Health. 2015;60:353–62.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Auger N, Bilodeau-Bertrand M, Costopoulos A. Language and infant mortality in a large Canadian province. Public Health. 2016;139:154–60.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Auger N, Bilodeau-Bertrand M, Costopoulos A. Identifying emerging reproductive vulnerability: an approach to decompose differences in total fertility. Ann Epidemiol. 2017;27:89–95.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Auger N, Tiandrazana RC, Healy-Profitós J, Costopoulos A. Inequality in fetal autopsy in Canada. J Health Care Poor Underserved. 2016;27:1384–96.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Statistics Canada. English, French and official language minorities in Canada. Catalogue 98-200-X2016011. Ottawa: Statistics Canada. http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2016/as-sa/98-200-x/2016011/98-200-x2016011-eng.cfm (2017). Accessed 6 Nov 2017.
  21. 21.
    Pampalon R, Hamel D, Gamache P, Philibert MD, Raymond G, Simpson A. An area-based material and social deprivation index for public health in Québec and Canada. Can J Public Health. 2012;103:S17–22.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Oza S, Cousens SN, Lawn JE. Estimation of daily risk of neonatal death, including the day of birth, in 186 countries in 2013: a vital-registration and modelling-based study. Lancet Glob Health. 2014;2:e635–e644.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kitagawa EM. Components of a difference between two rates. J Am Stat Assoc. 1995;50:1168–94.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Schempf A, Becker S. On the application of decomposition methods. Am J Public Health. 2006;96:1899.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Tan GC, Hayati AR, Khong TY. Low perinatal autopsy rate in Malaysia: time for a change. Pediatr Dev Pathol. 2010;13:362–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Martin M. Quebec and Ontario both tackling problem of providing minority-language health care. CMAJ 1992;146:1236–7.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ernst LM. A pathologist׳s perspective on the perinatal autopsy. Semin Perinatol. 2015;39:55–63.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Odendaal HJ, Elliott A, Kinney HC, Human M, Gaspar D, Petersen D, Randall B, Dempers J. Prenatal alcohol and SIDS and stillbirth (PASS) network: consent for autopsy research for unexpected death in early life. Obstet Gynecol. 2011;117:167–71.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Lussier M-H, Trempe N. The socioeconomic status of anglophones in Québec report. Montréal: Vice-présidence aux affaires scientifiques, Institut national de santé publique Québec. http://collections.banq.qc.ca/ark:/52327/2221331 (2012). Accessed 30 Oct 2017.
  30. 30.
    Costa S, Rodrigues M, Centeno MJ, Martins A, Vilan A, Brandão O, Guimarães H. Diagnosis and cause of death in a neonatal intensive care unit: how important is autopsy? J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2011;24:760–3.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of Montreal Hospital Research CentreMontrealCanada
  2. 2.Institut national de santé publique du QuébecMontrealCanada
  3. 3.Department of AnthropologyUniversity of AlbertaEdmontonCanada

Personalised recommendations