Child Health Booklet: experiences of professionals in primary health care

Abstract

RESUmEnObjetivo: Comprender las experiencias vividas por los profesionales de salud de la atención primaria con la Libreta de Salud del Niño en el cuidado a la salud infantil. Método: Estudio cualitativo de abordaje fenomenológico del que participaron enfermeros y médicos de seis equipos de Salud de la Familia de Belo Horizonte, MG. Fueron realizadas 12 entrevistas no directivas, guiadas por dos preguntas orientadoras. Resultados: El análisis comprensivo de las charlas posibilitó la construcción de tres categorías que señalan las experiencias vividas por los profesionales con la libreta. Las experiencias revelaron dificultades que se derivan de las limitaciones de conocimiento acerca del instrumento; el hecho de no rellenar en la libreta las acciones de los distintos profesionales que asisten al niño; los enfrentamientos cuotidianos del proceso y la organización del trabajo de los equipos; y el desinterés de las familias con el instrumento. Conclusión: La investigación apunta caminos posibles y necesarios para mejorar la utilización de la libreta como instrumento de vigilancia integral a la salud del niño. DESCRIPTORES ABSTRACTObjective: Understanding the experiences of health professionals in primary care with the Child Health Booklet in child health care. Method: A qualitative study with a phenomenological approach, in which participated nurses and doctors from six teams of the Family Health Strategy (FHS) in Belo Horizonte, MG. In total, were carried out 12 non-directive interviews, using two guiding questions. Results: A comprehensive analysis of the speeches enabled the construction of three categories that signal the experiences of the professionals with the booklet. The experiments revealed difficulties arising from the limitations of knowledge about the instrument; incomplete filling out of the booklet by many professionals that care for children; the daily confrontations of the process and the organization of work teams; disinterest of families with the instrument. Conclusion: The research points possible and necessary ways to improve the use of booklets as an instrument of full child health surveillance.

Práticas profissionais de saúde diante da linha cuidado à criança

“…41 From the perspective of child health surveillance, data from the Child Health Record (CHR) allow the identification of health problems, the classification of disease risks and the establishment of action priorities in search of effective results for comprehensive child care. 42 It is cautioned that, despite this, there is still limited knowledge about the correct completion of the CHR in childcare consultations, 13,31 because most professionals do not use the instrument effectively, illustratively and educationally with family members, which leads to their disinterest in the booklet.…”

“…This can compromise the quality of comprehensive child health care and the achievement of the objective of monitoring child growth and development. 13 Therefore, it is necessary, in view of the specific demands, a reorientation of the professional practices performed in the FHS, such as the child health care network, on the work environment and, especially, on the relationships established between health professionals and the family population enrolled in these services, resignifying care and investing in the provision of comprehensive, universal and quality care. It is understood that child care in care lines has the accompaniment of growth and development as a structuring axis, based on health promotion, prevention, early diagnosis and recovery of health problems.…”

Vigilância Do Desenvolvimento Infantil: Análise Da Situação Brasileira

“…Through the results of various studies, it is known that there are common difficulties in the filling out of the Card or the CSC, 32 , 33 , 34 like in the illustrative case of a study with nurses and doctors from ESF in Belo Horizonte (MG), which tries to understand the lived experiences with the CSC, especially the difficulties of the surveillance process, an inadequate organization of the daily work of the teams, the mother’s lack of interest, and the lack of knowledge about the instrument 32 . These restrictions were also found in Family Health Strategies in João Pessoa (PB) in a study with 45 nurses and 450 mothers with kids younger than two years old.…”

“…The study is structured as an intervention, using a “before and after.” In the study, initially, interviews with the mothers about these practices and the completion of workshops with the professionals involved were evaluated, in addition to the knowledge practices of the nurses with respect to the surveillance of child development. A reevaluation of the results was completed after 4 months, when an increase in the implementation of surveillance of child development was observed 33 . In a situation, diagnosis of the accompaniment of the growth and development of 1-year-old children, from the metropolitan region of Recife (PE) and the interior of the state of Pernambuco, in a sample of 816 evaluated children in 120 health units, it was found that 15.8% of the health units did not have the CSC and 75.4% did not have the development accompaniment norms, 34 despite the fact that the childcare activities in basic care were attributed to overcrowding of nursing professionals in these units.…”

Caderneta de saúde da criança: vigilância do crescimento e desenvolvimento infantil

“…Subtracted from these, 222 did not respond to the research question. We included, as final sample, 15 articles, [8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21] that are integrated into the corpus of the study for analysis and discussion. These articles were evaluated as to the level of evidence in: Level I -results from the meta-analysis of multiple controlled and randomized clinical studies; Level IIevidences resulting from individual studies with experimental design; Level III -findings from quasi-experimental studies; Level IVevidences of descriptive studies or qualitative approach; Level V -case or experience reports and Level VI -evidence based on expert opinions.…”