Community perspectives on barriers to injury care in Northern Malawi: a three delays framed assessment using focus groups and photovoice.

IF 2.7 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES BMC Health Services Research Pub Date : 2024-11-12 DOI:10.1186/s12913-024-11890-4
John Whitaker, Ella Togun, Levie Gondwe, Donaria Zgambo, Abena S Amoah, Albert Dube, Rory Rickard, Andrew Jm Leather, Justine Davies
{"title":"Community perspectives on barriers to injury care in Northern Malawi: a three delays framed assessment using focus groups and photovoice.","authors":"John Whitaker, Ella Togun, Levie Gondwe, Donaria Zgambo, Abena S Amoah, Albert Dube, Rory Rickard, Andrew Jm Leather, Justine Davies","doi":"10.1186/s12913-024-11890-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The global burden of injury is huge, falling disproportionately on poorer populations. The benefits of qualitative research in injury care are recognised and its application is growing. We used a novel application of focus group discussions with photovoice to rapidly assess barriers at each of three delay stages; seeking (delay-1), reaching (delay-2) or receiving (delay-3) injury care in Northern Malawi.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Three community Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) of individuals with (FGD1) and without (FGD2) recent injury experience and community leaders (FGD3) discussed barriers to seeking, reaching or receiving care following injury. Participants from FGD1 subsequently used a digital camera and, following training in photovoice, took photographs illustrating barriers to injury care. Participants reconvened to discuss images which they believed illustrated important barriers. A framework method analysis compared barriers generated to those identified by an earlier Delphi study.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Seven of eight invited adult community members attended each discussion group. Within the FGDs, all prior Delphi derived delay 1 barriers were described. Within delay 2, all but three were discussed by community participants. Those not covered were: 1) \"communication\" ;2) \"prehospital care\"; 3) \"coordination\". Within Delay 3, only \"capacity\"was not highlighted by participants during the study. Additional health system barriers not identified in the Delphi were inductively derived. Within Delay 1, these were labelled; \"religious or other beliefs\"; \"indecision\"; \"fear or lacking courage\"; and \"community/bystander engagement\". Within Delay 2, \"lack of assistance\" was derived. Within Delay 3; \"alleged corruption\"; \"interfacility transfer\"; and \"police processes\" were all identified during analysis. The photovoice group provided 21 photographs evidencing 15 barriers. Delay 1 was the most frequently captured by images (12/21).The individual barriers most frequently described were \"transport\" and \"roads\" (6/21 and 5/21, respectively). The photovoice group did not describe any additional barriers not covered in the prior FGDs.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We identified several barriers within this health system. Participants illustrated how some barriers impact on multiple phases of delay. The method was quick, low cost and participants grasped the technique and research question effectively. We recommend this approach for future health system assessments.</p>","PeriodicalId":9012,"journal":{"name":"BMC Health Services Research","volume":"24 1","pages":"1382"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11556202/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Health Services Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-024-11890-4","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: The global burden of injury is huge, falling disproportionately on poorer populations. The benefits of qualitative research in injury care are recognised and its application is growing. We used a novel application of focus group discussions with photovoice to rapidly assess barriers at each of three delay stages; seeking (delay-1), reaching (delay-2) or receiving (delay-3) injury care in Northern Malawi.

Methods: Three community Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) of individuals with (FGD1) and without (FGD2) recent injury experience and community leaders (FGD3) discussed barriers to seeking, reaching or receiving care following injury. Participants from FGD1 subsequently used a digital camera and, following training in photovoice, took photographs illustrating barriers to injury care. Participants reconvened to discuss images which they believed illustrated important barriers. A framework method analysis compared barriers generated to those identified by an earlier Delphi study.

Results: Seven of eight invited adult community members attended each discussion group. Within the FGDs, all prior Delphi derived delay 1 barriers were described. Within delay 2, all but three were discussed by community participants. Those not covered were: 1) "communication" ;2) "prehospital care"; 3) "coordination". Within Delay 3, only "capacity"was not highlighted by participants during the study. Additional health system barriers not identified in the Delphi were inductively derived. Within Delay 1, these were labelled; "religious or other beliefs"; "indecision"; "fear or lacking courage"; and "community/bystander engagement". Within Delay 2, "lack of assistance" was derived. Within Delay 3; "alleged corruption"; "interfacility transfer"; and "police processes" were all identified during analysis. The photovoice group provided 21 photographs evidencing 15 barriers. Delay 1 was the most frequently captured by images (12/21).The individual barriers most frequently described were "transport" and "roads" (6/21 and 5/21, respectively). The photovoice group did not describe any additional barriers not covered in the prior FGDs.

Conclusion: We identified several barriers within this health system. Participants illustrated how some barriers impact on multiple phases of delay. The method was quick, low cost and participants grasped the technique and research question effectively. We recommend this approach for future health system assessments.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
马拉维北部社区对伤害护理障碍的看法:利用焦点小组和摄影选择进行的三延迟框架评估。
导言:受伤给全球带来的负担是巨大的,对贫困人口的影响尤为严重。定性研究在伤害护理方面的益处已得到认可,其应用也在不断扩大。在马拉维北部,我们利用焦点小组讨论和摄影舆论的新颖应用,快速评估了三个延迟阶段的障碍:寻求(延迟-1)、到达(延迟-2)或接受(延迟-3)伤害护理:方法:由最近受过伤(FGD1)和没有受过伤(FGD2)的个人以及社区领袖(FGD3)组成的三个社区焦点小组讨论(FGD)讨论了受伤后寻求、到达或接受护理的障碍。FGD1 的参与者随后使用数码相机,并在接受摄影选择培训后,拍摄了说明受伤护理障碍的照片。参与者再次聚集在一起,讨论他们认为能够说明重要障碍的图片。通过框架方法分析,将所产生的障碍与早期德尔菲研究中发现的障碍进行了比较:八个受邀的成年社区成员中有七个参加了每个讨论小组。在 FGD 中,描述了所有先前德尔菲研究得出的延迟 1 障碍。在延迟 2 中,除三个障碍外,社区参与者讨论了其他所有障碍。未涉及的障碍有1) "沟通";2) "院前护理";3) "协调"。在 "延迟 3 "中,只有 "能力 "在研究中未被参与者强调。德尔菲研究中未发现的其他医疗系统障碍也被归纳出来。在延迟 1 中,这些障碍分别是:"宗教或其他信仰";"犹豫不决";"恐惧或缺乏勇气"; 以及 "社区/旁观者参与"。在延迟 2 中,得出了 "缺乏援助"。在 "延迟 3 "中,"涉嫌腐败"、"设施间转移 "和 "警察程序 "都在分析过程中被确定。摄影选择小组提供了 21 张照片,证明了 15 种障碍。描述最多的个别障碍是 "交通 "和 "道路"(分别为 6/21 和 5/21)。摄影选择小组没有描述之前的 FGD 没有涉及的其他障碍:结论:我们在该医疗系统中发现了若干障碍。参与者说明了一些障碍是如何影响延误的多个阶段的。该方法快速、低成本,参与者有效地掌握了技术和研究问题。我们建议在今后的卫生系统评估中采用这种方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
BMC Health Services Research
BMC Health Services Research 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
7.10%
发文量
1372
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: BMC Health Services Research is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all aspects of health services research, including delivery of care, management of health services, assessment of healthcare needs, measurement of outcomes, allocation of healthcare resources, evaluation of different health markets and health services organizations, international comparative analysis of health systems, health economics and the impact of health policies and regulations.
期刊最新文献
Exploring the experiences of resident doctors in child and adolescent psychiatry with virtual reality-based simulation training: a qualitative study. Distribution and predictors of haemophilia-related costs in the United Kingdom: analysis of the CHESS I and CHESS II burden of illness studies. Negotiating care in organizational borderlands: a grounded theory of inter-organizational collaboration in coordination of care. Equity and efficiency of health resource allocation in Sichuan Province, China. How to assess doctor managers' managerial attitude: results from an e-Delphi process.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1