No abstract
When COVID-19 hit India, a qualitative research study had been underway the southern state of Kerala, to understand the perspectives of the front-line health workers and the Kattunayakan tribal community towards health service utilisation. This community is relatively underserved, and a great deal of our emphasis was on understanding health system barriers experienced on both demand and supply side. COVID-19 showed us that these barriers pertain not just to heath systems, but also to the conduct of health research. We completed fieldwork in one hamlet before lockdowns were announced and changed our fieldwork approach for the remaining two different hamlets. The main change was a shift to the use of mobile telephony for fieldwork. This technological shift necessitated substantial changes in the design of fieldwork, the scope of our inquiry, as well as the composition and power dynamics within our team. First, adjusting to technology-driven fieldwork posed restrictions but also enhanced the agency and comfort of participants in some ways. Study design changes attributable to COVID-19 restrictions were brought about, but also gave us critical insight into the impact of COVID-19 and related outbreaks. There was de fact greater reliance on community researchers, which meant we ceded control to the community itself, upsetting typical research power dynamics, which can be quite top-down. We present these methodological reflections for wider consideration.
Background Among the core principles of the 2030 agenda of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) is the call to Leave no One behind (LNOB), a principle that gained resonance as the world contended with the COVID-19 pandemic. The south Indian state of Kerala received acclaim globally for its efforts in managing COVID-19 pandemic. Less attention has been paid, however, to how inclusive this management was, as well as if and how those “left behind” in testing, care, treatment, and vaccination efforts were identified and catered to. Filling this gap was the aim of our study. Methods We conducted In-depth interviews with 80 participants from four districts of Kerala from July to October 2021. Participants included elected local self-government members, medical and public health staff, as well as community leaders. Following written informed consent procedures, each interviewee was asked questions about whom they considered the most “vulnerable” in their areas. They were also asked if there were any special programmes/schemes to support the access of “vulnerable” groups to general and COVID related health services, as well as other needs. Recordings were transliterated into English and analysed thematically by a team of researchers using ATLAS.ti 9.1 software. Results The age range of participants was between 35 and 60 years. Vulnerability was described differentially by geography and economic context; for e.g., fisherfolk were identified in coastal areas while migrant labourers were considered as vulnerable in semi-urban areas. In the context of COVID-19, some participants reflected that everyone was vulnerable. In most cases, vulnerable groups were already beneficiaries of various government schemes within and beyond the health sector. During COVID, the government prioritized access to COVID-19 testing and vaccination among marginalized population groups like palliative care patients, the elderly, migrant labourers, as well as Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes communities. Livelihood support like food kits, community kitchen, and patient transportation were provided by the LSGs to support these groups. This involved coordination between health and other departments, which may be formalised, streamlined and optimised in the future. Conclusion Health system actors and local self-government members were aware of vulnerable populations prioritized under various schemes but did not describe vulnerable groups beyond this. Emphasis was placed on the broad range of services made available to these “left behind” groups through interdepartmental and multi-stakeholder collaboration. Further study (currently underway) may offer insights into how these communities – identified as vulnerable – perceive themselves, and whether/how they receive, and experience schemes designed for them. At the program level, inclusive and innovative identification and recruitment mechanisms need to be devised to identify populations who are currently left behind but may still be invisible to system actors and leaders.
Background In 2016, the Government of the southern Indian state of Kerala launched the Aardram mission, a set of reforms in the state’s health sector with the support of Local Self Governments (LSG). Primary Health Centres (PHCs) were slated for transformation into Family Health Centres (FHCs), with extended hours of operation as well as improved quality and range of services. With the COVID-19 pandemic emerging soon after their introduction, we studied the outcomes of the transformation from PHC to FHC and how they related to primary healthcare service delivery during COVID-19. Methods A qualitative study was conducted using In-depth interviews with 80 health system actors (male n = 32, female n = 48) aged between 30–63 years in eight primary care facilities of four districts in Kerala from July to October 2021. Participants included LSG members, medical and public health staff, as well as community leaders. Questions about the need for primary healthcare reforms, their implementation, challenges, achievements, and the impact of COVID-19 on service delivery were asked. Written informed consent was obtained and interview transcripts – transliterated into English—were thematically analysed by a team of four researchers using ATLAS.ti 9 software. Results LSG members and health staff felt that the PHC was an institution that guarantees preventive, promotive, and curative care to the poorest section of society and can help in reducing the high cost of care. Post-transformation to FHCs, improved timings, additional human resources, new services, fully functioning laboratories, and well stocked pharmacies were observed and linked to improved service utilization and reduced cost of care. Challenges of geographical access remained, along with concerns about the lack of attention to public health functions, and sustainability in low-revenue LSGs. COVID-19 pandemic restrictions disrupted promotive services, awareness sessions and outreach activities; newly introduced services were stopped, and outpatient numbers were reduced drastically. Essential health delivery and COVID-19 management increased the workload of health workers and LSG members, as the emphasis was placed on managing the COVID-19 pandemic and delivering essential health services. Conclusion Most of the health system actors expressed their belief in and commitment to primary health care reforms and noted positive impacts on the clinical side with remaining challenges of access, outreach, and sustainability. COVID-19 reduced service coverage and utilisation, but motivated greater efforts on the part of both health workers and community representatives. Primary health care is a shared priority now, with a need for greater focus on systems strengthening, collaboration, and primary prevention.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.