Doctoral Degrees (Centre for Disability and Rehabilitation Studies)

Permanent URI for this collection

https://scholar.sun.ac.za/handle/10019.1/100751

Browse

Browsing Doctoral Degrees (Centre for Disability and Rehabilitation Studies) by Subject "Communication in medicine -- Elliotdale (South Africa)"

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    An exploration of the development of community health forums as a strategy to improve communication between biomedical health professionals and an indigenous community : a rural participatory action research study
    (Stellenbosch : Stellenbosch University, 2021-12) Gxamza, Faniswa Desiree; Mji, Gubela; Reid, Steve; Stellenbosch University. Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences. Centre for Rehabilitation Studies.
    ENGLISH SUMMARY : Rationale: Firstly, the existence of nine (9) clinics and a district hospital in Bomvaneland has been seen by people of this area as both a blessing and a problem as there is poor communication between allopathic health workers and the indigenous community. Allopathic health practitioners (AHP) chastise and marginalize patients who have used indigenous health (IH) prior to visiting allopathic healthcare services. Secondly, the complexity of understanding IH and that indigenous people have a concept of health that is eco-social and often communal, rather than individual. Thirdly, there is lack of institutional spaces where both indigenous knowledge system (IKS) and allopathic healthcare could be discussed for promoting wellness and quality of life of Bomvane people. Aim and Objectives: The study explored and described the development of a Community Health Forum as a strategy to improve communication between allopathic health practitioners and an indigenous community. The main study objectives were to explore and describe: • The process of establishing relationships and development of community partnerships. • Development of community health forums as a strategy to improve communication between allopathic health professionals and an indigenous community. Method: The main methods for data collection were ethnographic and participatory action research (PAR). Using participatory action research in cycles of reflection, the study covered four phases (1-4) to gain consensus on the main aim of the study, study objectives and data collection methods. During community entry and the three conferences (2016, 2018 and 2019), key community stakeholders from the nine (9) sub-municipalities of the research area participated. Mji’s critical research findings were used as a tool to initiate communication. Phase 5 focused on the development of a community health forum and data was collected from four sub-municipalities (Xhora, Gusi, Hobeni and Nkanya). Purposive and snowball sampling was used to select n=37 study participants (12 being allopathic health practitioners, eight indigenous healers and 15 community members). Data-gathering methods for phase 5, included focus group discussions, in-depth interviews, (Chilisa, 2012), journaling and photography. Phase 6 was the last method of data collection which was a conference in 2019 to pilot a community health forum. Findings: The study findings further affirmed the earlier propositions of challenges of communication and poor relationships between allopathic and indigenous health practitioners. When sick, the indigenous community uses both the indigenous and allopathic health practitioners. Some attempts had been made to improve these poor relationships by introducing a referral system, unfortunately this attempt was still not sufficient as it appears only the indigenous health practitioners refer their patients to allopathic health practitioners. This caused indigenous health practitioners to feel they are still not trusted by allopathic health practitioners. An outline was given by participants on the nature of future communication, including a framework that will drive the communication process between allopathic and indigenous health practitioners. At the core of this outline is a need for the communication process to be underpinned by respect for each other’s human dignity. One of the major findings of the study is the development of an Interim community health forum which was achieved in Phase 6 of this study. Mji’s critical research findings further affirmed negative social determinants of health (NSDH) that were blighting AmaBomvane. Unfortunately, it appears that with passage of time these had become worse with fighting of children and sickly older males suffering from ailments due to working in the mines. What gave hope out of this concerning situation is the draft MOU that was developed by the indigenous health practitioners. Within this MOU are guiding principles which are positive social determinants of health (PSDH) to support AmaBomvane to turn around the NSDH to PSDH. Conclusion: The dual health-seeking behaviour of AmaBomvana should not be seen in a negative light by allopathic health practitioners, instead they should try to understand more about indigenous health and its practises. The chastising of indigenous patients when they have consulted indigenous healers results in the silencing of indigenous patients. Communication is at the core of proper diagnosis and subsequent care for the sick patient. The paradigmatic differences that exist between allopathic and indigenous health practitioners might need time to be resolved. The community health forum seems to offer a bridge for these two constituencies to work together in a respectful manner despite their differences. These two healthcare systems need to acknowledge their different practices and come to a realisation that working together may not be possible but working in parallel and focusing on certain areas, such as social determinants of health, would improve the health of Bomvane people. In the wake of Covid-19 Pandemic, the suggested model (CHF) is a way forward for the area.