Collaboration between traditional health practitioners and biomedical health practitioners: Scoping review.

IF 1.2 Q4 PRIMARY HEALTH CARE
Ngcwalisa A Jama, Anam Nyembezi, Sekgameetse Ngcobo, Uta Lehmann
{"title":"Collaboration between traditional health practitioners and biomedical health practitioners: Scoping review.","authors":"Ngcwalisa A Jama, Anam Nyembezi, Sekgameetse Ngcobo, Uta Lehmann","doi":"10.4102/phcfm.v16i1.4430","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong> Collaboration between traditional health practitioners (THPs) and biomedical health practitioners (BHPs) is highly recommended in catering for pluralistic healthcare users. Little is known about bidirectional collaborations at healthcare service provision level.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong> To map global evidence on collaboration attempts between THPs and BHPs between January 1978 and August 2023.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong> We followed the Arksey and O'Malley framework in conducting this scoping review. Two reviewers independently screened articles for eligibility. A descriptive numerical and content analysis was performed on ATLAS.ti 22. A narrative summary of the findings was reported using the PRISMAScR guideline.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong> Of the 8404 screened studies, 10 studies from 12 articles were included in the final review. Studies came from America (n = 5), Africa (n = 2), China (n = 2) and New Zealand (n = 1). Eight studies reported case studies of bidirectional collaboration programmes, while two studies reported on experimental research. All collaborations occurred within biomedical healthcare facilities. Collaboration often entailed activities such as relationship building, training of all practitioners, coordinated meetings, cross-referrals, treatment plan discussions and joint health promotion activities.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong> This study confirmed that practitioner-level collaborations within healthcare are few and sparse. More work is needed to move policy on integration of the two systems into implementation. There is a need to conduct more research and document emerging collaborations.Contribution: This research illuminates the contextual challenges associated with sustaining collaborations. The data would be important in informing areas that need strengthening in the work towards integration of THPs and BHPs.</p>","PeriodicalId":47037,"journal":{"name":"African Journal of Primary Health Care & Family Medicine","volume":"16 1","pages":"e1-e11"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11304181/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"African Journal of Primary Health Care & Family Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4102/phcfm.v16i1.4430","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PRIMARY HEALTH CARE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background:  Collaboration between traditional health practitioners (THPs) and biomedical health practitioners (BHPs) is highly recommended in catering for pluralistic healthcare users. Little is known about bidirectional collaborations at healthcare service provision level.

Aim:  To map global evidence on collaboration attempts between THPs and BHPs between January 1978 and August 2023.

Method:  We followed the Arksey and O'Malley framework in conducting this scoping review. Two reviewers independently screened articles for eligibility. A descriptive numerical and content analysis was performed on ATLAS.ti 22. A narrative summary of the findings was reported using the PRISMAScR guideline.

Results:  Of the 8404 screened studies, 10 studies from 12 articles were included in the final review. Studies came from America (n = 5), Africa (n = 2), China (n = 2) and New Zealand (n = 1). Eight studies reported case studies of bidirectional collaboration programmes, while two studies reported on experimental research. All collaborations occurred within biomedical healthcare facilities. Collaboration often entailed activities such as relationship building, training of all practitioners, coordinated meetings, cross-referrals, treatment plan discussions and joint health promotion activities.

Conclusion:  This study confirmed that practitioner-level collaborations within healthcare are few and sparse. More work is needed to move policy on integration of the two systems into implementation. There is a need to conduct more research and document emerging collaborations.Contribution: This research illuminates the contextual challenges associated with sustaining collaborations. The data would be important in informing areas that need strengthening in the work towards integration of THPs and BHPs.

传统保健医生与生物医学保健医生之间的合作:范围审查。
背景: 传统保健医生(THPs)和生物医学保健医生(BHPs)之间的合作在满足多元化医疗保健用户需求方面备受推崇。目的:调查 1978 年 1 月至 2023 年 8 月期间全球传统保健医生与生物保健医生之间合作尝试的证据: 方法:我们遵循 Arksey 和 O'Malley 框架进行了此次范围界定综述。两名审稿人分别独立筛选符合条件的文章。在 ATLAS.ti 22 上进行了描述性数字和内容分析。采用 PRISMAScR 指南对研究结果进行了叙述性总结: 在筛选出的 8404 项研究中,有 12 篇文章中的 10 项研究被纳入最终审查。这些研究分别来自美国(5 项)、非洲(2 项)、中国(2 项)和新西兰(1 项)。八项研究报告了双向合作计划的案例研究,两项研究报告了实验研究。所有合作都发生在生物医学保健设施内。合作通常包括建立关系、培训所有从业人员、协调会议、交叉转诊、讨论治疗方案和联合健康促进活动等活动: 这项研究证实,医疗保健行业内从业人员层面的合作很少且稀缺。还需要做更多的工作来推动两个系统整合政策的实施。有必要开展更多研究并记录新出现的合作:贡献:这项研究揭示了与持续合作相关的背景挑战。这些数据对于了解在实现临时居住点和必威体育官网整合工作中需要加强的领域非常重要。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
10.00%
发文量
81
审稿时长
15 weeks
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信