Search

Health care challenges in remote rural municipalities (RRMs) emphasize the importance of primary health care (PHC) and require an expanded scope of practice. Doctors are key actors in this context. The aim of this study was to explore the level of integration of doctors in RRMs and working practices. We conducted a qualitative study involving semi-structured interviews with 46 PHC doctors working in 27 RRMs in Brazil. Content analysis was performed, resulting in the identification of categories of analysis grouped under three core dimensions: doctor training and experience; comprehensive care and timely access; and the community-based approach. Doctors working in RRMs were mainly recent graduates with limited experience who had undertaken their degree outside Brazil, and care was focused on the individual. The findings also revealed weak sociocultural adaptation and a harsh working environment and issues related to social status that reinforced prejudice against rurality and poverty. Practice was limited in scope and care tended to be oriented towards acute problems, disease-centered and focused on the biomedical model of medicine. Barriers to the delivery of comprehensive care include both structural constraints, such as poor facilities and centralization of services in administrative centers, and the lack of professional competencies necessary for PHC in these areas. The findings point to the need to promote an expanded scope of practice in PHC delivery in RRMs, with major public investment in the promotion of training and strengthening career pathways in these areas. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The Brazilian Government created Participatory Health Councils (PHCs) to allow citizen participation in the public health policy process. PHCs are advisory bodies that operate at all levels of government and that bring together different societal groups to monitor Brazil's health system. Today they are present in 98% of Brazilian cities, demonstrating their popularity and thus their potential to help ensure that health policies are in line with citizen preferences. Despite their expansive reach, their real impact on health policies and health outcomes for citizens is uncertain. We thus ask the following question: Do PHCs offer meaningful opportunities for open participation and influence in the public health policy process? Methods: Thirty-eight semi-structured interviews with health council members were conducted. Data from these interviews were analyzed using a qualitative interpretive content analysis approach. A quantitative analysis of PHC data from the Sistema de Acompanhamento dos Conselhos de Saude (SIACS) database was also conducted to corroborate findings from the interviews. Results: We learned that PHCs fall short in many of the categories of good governance. Government manipulation of the agenda and leadership of the PHCs, delays in the implementation of PHC decision making, a lack of training of council members on relevant technical issues, the largely narrow interests of council members, the lack of transparency and monitoring guidelines, a lack of government support, and a lack of inclusiveness are a few examples that highlight why PHCs are not as effective as they could be. Conclusions: Although PHCs are intended to be inclusive and participatory, in practice they seem to have little impact on the health policymaking process in Brazil. PHCs will only be able to fulfil their mandate when we see good governance largely present. This will require a rethinking of their governance structures, processes, membership, and oversight. If change is resisted, the PHCs will remain largely limited to a good idea in theory that is disappointing in practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]