The PAR process had a positive effect on the doctor–patient encounter. The model was interpreted and conclusions were drawn. A model was constructed to depict the themes and their interrelatedness. The reflective diary was analysed similarly. ![]() The recorded meetings and interviews were transcribed and translated and themes subsequently identified using the transcripts. Three free attitude interviews were conducted with the author over the research period to elicit the development of his understanding about mutual participation in the doctor–patient encounter. One member of each group kept a written record of each meeting. Additionally, the author, who facilitated the meetings, kept a reflective diary, including field notes over the research period. ![]() The primary question for each meeting was how the group could work together to achieve the best possible health outcome for the patient. The meetings were conducted in Tsonga, which is the local vernacular. ![]() Seven meetings were held with each group over a period of 6 months. ![]() Four patients with terminal illnesses formed groups with their family members, neighbours and friends. The author used PAR firstly to develop a deeper understanding of mutual participation in the doctor–patient encounter and secondly to apply this learning in a rural cross-cultural practice setting. The aim of the article is to demonstrate the usefulness of participatory action research (PAR) in primary care.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |