Acceptability of a resource-oriented approach (DIALOG+) among patients with chronic physical illnesses in primary health care-Uganda, a qualitative study.

IF 2.6 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL BMC primary care Pub Date : 2024-12-19 DOI:10.1186/s12875-024-02681-1
Racheal Alinaitwe, N Nakasujja, H Birabwa-Oketcho, Akena Dickens, Francois van Loggerenberg, W W Muhwezi, Seggane Musisi, V Bird, S Priebe, N Sewankambo
{"title":"Acceptability of a resource-oriented approach (DIALOG+) among patients with chronic physical illnesses in primary health care-Uganda, a qualitative study.","authors":"Racheal Alinaitwe, N Nakasujja, H Birabwa-Oketcho, Akena Dickens, Francois van Loggerenberg, W W Muhwezi, Seggane Musisi, V Bird, S Priebe, N Sewankambo","doi":"10.1186/s12875-024-02681-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Chronic physical illnesses are often associated with significant psychological distress and chronic mental illnesses are often co-morbid with physical illnesses. Efforts to integrate mental health into primary health care in Uganda are underway. However, there are enormous logistical challenges. Effective resource-oriented and evidence-based interventions such as DIALOG + have the potential to improve treatment outcomes for patients with chronic conditions. We aimed to assess the acceptability of DIALOG + among patients with chronic physical illnesses in Uganda.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a qualitative aspect of a mixed methods exploratory non-controlled study conducted in chronic physical illness out-patient clinics at two hospitals in Uganda. We conducted fifteen in-depth interviews with patients, ten key informant interviews with clinicians, and four focus group discussions with patients. Thematic data analysis was done through an iterative process.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The results support the acceptability of the intervention as evidenced by willingness to participate, better relationships between patients and clinicians, and improved control of both physical illnesses and psychological distress. Participants also talked about ways in which the implementation of DIALOG + could be improved.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>DIALOG + is acceptable among patients with chronic physical illness in primary health care settings in Uganda.</p>","PeriodicalId":72428,"journal":{"name":"BMC primary care","volume":"25 1","pages":"429"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11656955/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC primary care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-024-02681-1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Chronic physical illnesses are often associated with significant psychological distress and chronic mental illnesses are often co-morbid with physical illnesses. Efforts to integrate mental health into primary health care in Uganda are underway. However, there are enormous logistical challenges. Effective resource-oriented and evidence-based interventions such as DIALOG + have the potential to improve treatment outcomes for patients with chronic conditions. We aimed to assess the acceptability of DIALOG + among patients with chronic physical illnesses in Uganda.

Methods: This was a qualitative aspect of a mixed methods exploratory non-controlled study conducted in chronic physical illness out-patient clinics at two hospitals in Uganda. We conducted fifteen in-depth interviews with patients, ten key informant interviews with clinicians, and four focus group discussions with patients. Thematic data analysis was done through an iterative process.

Results: The results support the acceptability of the intervention as evidenced by willingness to participate, better relationships between patients and clinicians, and improved control of both physical illnesses and psychological distress. Participants also talked about ways in which the implementation of DIALOG + could be improved.

Conclusion: DIALOG + is acceptable among patients with chronic physical illness in primary health care settings in Uganda.

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
一项定性研究:乌干达初级卫生保健机构中的慢性病患者对以资源为导向的方法(DIALOG+)的接受程度。
背景:慢性躯体疾病常伴有显著的心理困扰,慢性精神疾病常与躯体疾病共病。乌干达正在努力将精神卫生纳入初级卫生保健。然而,这里存在着巨大的后勤挑战。有效的资源导向和循证干预措施,如DIALOG +,有可能改善慢性病患者的治疗结果。我们的目的是评估DIALOG +在乌干达慢性身体疾病患者中的可接受性。方法:这是在乌干达两家医院的慢性身体疾病门诊进行的一项混合方法探索性非对照研究的定性方面。我们对患者进行了15次深度访谈,对临床医生进行了10次关键信息提供者访谈,并与患者进行了4次焦点小组讨论。专题数据分析是通过迭代过程完成的。结果:通过参与意愿、患者与临床医生之间更好的关系以及改善身体疾病和心理困扰的控制,结果支持干预的可接受性。与会者还讨论了如何改进DIALOG +的实施。结论:DIALOG +在乌干达初级卫生保健机构的慢性躯体疾病患者中是可接受的。
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
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Work preferences and motivations of young general practitioners in Switzerland: findings from a cross-sectional survey of the Swiss Young General Practitioners Association (JHaS). Clinical and cost effectiveness of nurse led-structured management of diarrhoea predominant irritable bowel syndrome in primary care (Lincolnshire POACHER study); a randomised control trial. Association of serum albumin level, feeding route, and mobility status with pressure ulcer presence in bedridden adults receiving long-term care. What do patients and clinicians think about interventions which prioritise continuity for certain patients in primary care? Evaluating the participatory processes within the OECD PaRIS project in Saskatchewan: lessons learned about recruitment and engagement.
×
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:604180095
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