48
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Assessing community perspectives of the community based education and service model at Makerere University, Uganda: a qualitative evaluation

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Community partnerships are defined as groups working together with shared goals, responsibilities, and power to improve the community. There is growing evidence that these partnerships contribute to the success and sustainability of community-based education and service programs (COBES), facilitating change in community actions and attitudes. Makerere University College of Health Sciences (MakCHS) is forging itself as a transformational institution in Uganda and the region. The College is motivated to improve the health of Ugandans through innovative responsive teaching, provision of service, and community partnerships. Evaluating the COBES program from the community perspective can assist the College in refining an innovative and useful model that has potential to improve the health of Ugandans.

          Methods

          A stratified random sample of 11 COBES sites was selected to examine the community’s perception of the program. Key Informant Interviews of 11 site tutors and 33 community members were completed. The data was manually analyzed and themes developed.

          Results

          Communities stated the students consistently engaged with them with culturally appropriate behaviour. They rated the student’s communication as very good even though translators were frequently needed. Half the community stated they received some feedback from the students, but some communities interpreted any contact after the initial visit as feedback. Communities confirmed and appreciated that the students provided a number of interventions and saw positive changes in health and health seeking behaviours. The community reflected that some programs were more sustainable than others; the projects that needed money to implement were least sustainable. The major challenges from the community included community fatigue, and poor motivation of community leaders to continue to take students without compensation.

          Conclusions

          Communities hosting Makerere students valued the students’ interventions and the COBES model. They reported witnessing health benefits of fewer cases of disease, increased health seeking behavior and sustainable healthcare programs. The evidence suggests that efforts to standardize objectives, implement structural adjustments, and invest in development of the program would yield even more productive community interactions and a healthcare workforce with public health skills needed to work in rural communities.

          Related collections

          Most cited references11

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          A review of collaborative partnerships as a strategy for improving community health.

          Collaborative partnerships (people and organizations from multiple sectors working together in common purpose) are a prominent strategy for community health improvement. This review examines evidence about the effects of collaborative partnerships on (a) community and systems change (environmental changes), (b) community-wide behavior change, and (c) more distant population-level health outcomes. We also consider the conditions and factors that may determine whether collaborative partnerships are effective. The review concludes with specific recommendations designed to enhance research and practice and to set conditions for promoting community health.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Patient race/ethnicity and quality of patient-physician communication during medical visits.

            We examined the association between patient race/ethnicity and patient-physician communication during medical visits. We used audiotape and questionnaire data collected in 1998 and 2002 to determine whether the quality of medical-visit communication differs among African American versus White patients. We analyzed data from 458 African American and White patients who visited 61 physicians in the Baltimore, Md-Washington, DC-Northern Virginia metropolitan area. Outcome measures that assessed the communication process, patient-centeredness, and emotional tone (affect) of the medical visit were derived from audiotapes coded by independent raters. Physicians were 23% more verbally dominant and engaged in 33% less patient-centered communication with African American patients than with White patients. Furthermore, both African American patients and their physicians exhibited lower levels of positive affect than White patients and their physicians did. Patient-physician communication during medical visits differs among African American versus White patients. Interventions that increase physicians' patient-centeredness and awareness of affective cues with African Americans patients and that activate African American patients to participate in their health care are important strategies for addressing racial/ethnic disparities in health care.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Building and maintaining trust in a community-based participatory research partnership.

              Although intervention research is vital to eliminating health disparities, many groups with health disparities have had negative research experiences, leading to an understandable distrust of researchers and the research process. Community-based participatory research (CBPR) approaches seek to reverse this pattern by building trust between community members and researchers. We highlight strategies for building and maintaining trust from an American Indian CBPR project and focus on 2 levels of trust building and maintaining: (1) between university and community partners and (2) between the initial project team and the larger community. This article was cowritten by community and academic partners; by offering the voices of community partners, it provides a novel and distinctive contribution to the CBPR literature.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Conference
                BMC Int Health Hum Rights
                BMC International Health and Human Rights
                BioMed Central
                1472-698X
                2011
                9 March 2011
                : 11
                : Suppl 1
                : S6
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Nursing, School of Health Science, College of Health Sciences, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda
                [2 ]Department of Dentistry, School of Health Sciences, College of Health Sciences, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda
                [3 ]Department of Pharmacy, School of Health Sciences, College of Health Sciences, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda
                [4 ]School of Medicine, College of Health Sciences, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda
                [5 ]Johns Hopkins School of Nursing, Baltimore, Maryland, 21205, USA
                [6 ]Johns Hopkins School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, 21205, USA
                Article
                1472-698X-11-S1-S6
                10.1186/1472-698X-11-S1-S6
                3059478
                21411006
                332ebaaa-a89a-4959-96b5-eb4a967c8f83
                Copyright ©2011 Mbalinda et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                Categories
                Research

                Health & Social care
                Health & Social care

                Comments

                Comment on this article