Health professionals and patients’ perspectives on person-centred maternal and child healthcare in Burkina Faso
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
CONTEXT: The person-centred approach (PCA) is a promising avenue for care improvement. However, health professionals in Burkina Faso (hereafter referred to as caregivers) seem unprepared for taking into consideration patients' preferences and values in the context of healthcare provision. OBJECTIVE: To understand the meaning attributed to PCA in the Burkina Faso context of care and to identify the challenges related to its adoption from the perspective of caregivers and women service users (hereafter referred to as patients). METHODS: An ethnographic qualitative research design was used in this study. We conducted 31 semi-directed interviews with caregivers and patients from Koudougou (Burkina Faso) healthcare facilities. We also carried out direct observation of consultations. Data thematic analyses are based on the person-centred approach analysis framework. RESULTS: According to the caregivers and patients interviewed, the PCA in maternal and child healthcare in Burkina Faso includes the following five components used in our analytical framework: i) pregnancy follow-up consultations extend beyond examining physical health issues (biopsychosocial component), ii) healthcare professionals' mood affects the caregiver-patient relationship as well as care delivery (the healthcare professional as a person), iii) patients expect to be well received, listened to, and respected (the patient as a person), iv) healthcare professionals first acknowledge that both themselves and patients have power, rights but also responsibilities (sharing power, rights and responsibilities of professionals and patients), and v) healthcare professionals who are open to involving patients in decision-making about their care and patients asking to have a say in the organization of services (therapeutic alliance). Implementing each of these themes comes with challenges, such as i) talking about health problems in the presence of other women, especially those related to sexuality, even though they are common to parturient women (biopsychosocial component); ii) offering psychotherapy to healthcare professionals (healthcare professional as a person); iii) taking into consideration patients' cultural and linguistic differences (the patient as a person); iv) raising awareness among patients about their right to ask questions and healthcare professionals' duty to answer them (sharing power, and rights and responsibilities of professionals and patients); v) accepting the presence of birth attendants while avoiding traditional practices that are contrary to scientific recommendations (therapeutic alliance). CONCLUSION: Despite some context-specific particularities, the PCA is not new in the context of health care in Burkina Faso. However, its implementation can pose a number of challenges. There is a need to train healthcare professionals with a view to being sensitive to these particularities. This may also require organizational adjustments so as to create the physical and sociocultural environments that are conducive to taking into account the patient's perspective.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,006 | 0,008 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,011 | 0,005 |
| Communication savante | 0,004 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,005 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».