Exploring mental health practice among Traditional health practitioners: a qualitative study in rural Kenya

Abstract Background In low- and middle-income countries, the paucity of conventional health services means that many people with mental health problems rely on traditional health practitioners (THPs). This paper examines the possibility of forging partnerships at the Primary Health Care (PHC) level in two geopolitical regions of Ghana, to maximize the benefits to both health systems. Methods The study was a qualitative cross-sectional survey. Eight (8) focus group discussions (FGDs) were conducted between February and April 2014. The views of THPs, PHC providers, service users (i.e. patients) and their caregivers, on the perceived benefits, barriers and facilitators of forging partnerships were examined. A thematic framework approach was employed for analysis. Results The study revealed that underlying the widespread approval of forging partnerships, there were mutual undertones of suspicion. While PHC providers were mainly concerned that THPs may incur harms to service users (e.g., through delays in care pathways and human rights abuses), service users and their caregivers highlighted the failure of conventional medical care to meet their healthcare needs. There are practical challenges to these collaborations, including the lack of options to adequately deal with human rights issues such as some patients being chained and exposed to the vagaries of the weather at THPs. There is also the issue of the frequent shortage of psychotropic medication at PHCs. Conclusion Addressing these barriers could enhance partnerships. There is also a need to educate all providers, which should include sessions clarifying the potential value of such partnerships.

Download Full-text

Tswana traditional health practitioners’ perspectives on the management of diabetes and hypertension: a qualitative study using focus group discussions

Pan African Medical Journal ◽

10.11604/pamj.2019.34.93.19112 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 34 ◽

Author(s):

Ebenezer Frimpong ◽

Manimbulu Nlooto

Keyword(s):

Focus Group ◽

Qualitative Study ◽

Focus Group Discussions ◽

Group Discussions ◽

Traditional Health ◽

Traditional Health Practitioners ◽

Health Practitioners

Download Full-text

Evidence of past and current collaborations between traditional health practitioners and biomedical health practitioners: a scoping review protocol

BMJ Open ◽

10.1136/bmjopen-2020-043452 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 11 (1) ◽

pp. e043452

Author(s):

Ngcwalisa Amanda Jama ◽

Anam Nyembezi ◽

Uta Lehmann

Keyword(s):

Mental Health ◽

Open Access ◽

Health System ◽

Scoping Review ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Academic Research ◽

Open Access Journal ◽

Traditional Health ◽

Traditional Health Practitioners ◽

Health Practitioners

IntroductionHealthcare seekers around the globe use more than one healthcare system, with most using the traditional and the Western approaches concurrently. To date, little collaboration between the two systems has taken place within the mental health space compared with other areas of medicine. In order to inform integrating plans for traditional health practitioners and biomedical health practitioners in the South African mental health system, it is important to know which models of collaboration are used in other medical settings and contexts. This study aims to document global evidence on collaboration practices between traditional health practitioners and biomedical professionals when working with various health conditions.Methods and analysisThis scoping review will be guided by an improved Arksey and O’Malley framework, the 2010 Levac et al methodological framework and the 2017 Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines. A systematic literature search will be carried out using seven different databases, EMBASE, PubMed, LILACS MEDLINE, APA PsycArticles, CINAHL Plus, Academic Search Complete and Scopus, in addition to the WHO repository, bibliographical search engines, and Open Access Theses and Dissertations. Moreover, the references of relevant publications between January 1978 and March 2020 will be scanned. Two reviewers will independently screen articles for eligibility based on the predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Thematic analysis and descriptive numerical analysis will be performed using ATLAS.ti V.8 and Excel software, respectively. The results for this review will be presented using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis: Extension for Scoping Review.Ethics and disseminationThis study will not require ethics approval because publicly available material will be used. Study findings will be published in an open-access journal and be presented to other key health system stakeholders and academic research gatherings.

Download Full-text