The anthropology of health systems: A history and review

"Poor and Dirty": Unintended consequences in a hygiene material Distribution in Burkina Faso

The practical interrelationships between the African environment and hygiene practices during a pandemic period is a topic of significant importance. Specifically, this research explores the intersection of cultural dynamics and hygiene practices in Burkina Faso, focusing on a recent example of distribution of hygiene materials. It highlights the negative reactions to these foreign interventions, perceived as patronizing and stigmatizing, which underscores the complexities of implementing health initiatives in diverse socio-cultural landscapes. These findings stress the importance of culturally sensitive approaches and greater engagement in public health initiatives like the latrine usage with specific designs for communities.

Pragmatic patchwork ethnography, a call to action for health, nutrition and dietetic researchers

Qualitative research methods are increasingly used in nutrition and dietetics research. Ethnography is an underexploited approach which seeks to explore the diversity of people and cultures in a given setting, providing a better understanding of the influences that determine their choices and behaviours. It is argued that traditional ethnography, that is, the methodology of living within participant communities, is a dated practice, with roots in colonialism, accessible to only researchers with the means, connections and status to conduct such research, typically white, privileged males. This paper proposes a formal interpretation of 'patchwork ethnography', whereby research is carried out in situ around existing modern-day commitments of the researcher, thus enabling more researchers within health, nutrition and dietetic practice to benefit from the rich data that can be discovered from communities. This review proposes the concept that pragmatic patchwork ethnography is required, proposing a framework for implementation, providing researchers, particularly within the fields of human nutrition, dietetics and health, the accessibility and means to deploy a meaningful client-centric methodology. We present pragmatic patchwork ethnography as a modern method for use within multiple healthcare settings, thus adding a progressive brick in the wall of qualitative research.

Extra/ordinary medicine: Toward an anthropology of primary care

Primary care is at the forefront of healthcare delivery. It is the site of disease prevention and health management and serves as the bridge between communities and the health care system As ethnographers of primary care, in this article we discuss what is gained by situating anthropological inquiry within primary care. We articulate how anthropologists can contribute to a better understanding of the issues that emerge in primary care. We provide a review of anthropological work in primary care and offer empirical data from two ethnographic case studies based in the United States, one focused on social risk screening in primary care and the other examining the diagnosis and care of people with dementia in primary care. Through these cases, we demonstrate how research of and within primary care can open important avenues for the study of the multidimensionality of primary care. This multidimensionality is apparent in the ways the medical field addresses the social and structural experiences of patients, scope of practice and disciplinary boundaries, and the intersection of ordinary and extraordinary medicine that emerge in the care of patients in primary care.

Anthropologies of health policy

In this introduction to our special issue, we take a wide view of the history and epistemic stakes of anthropological and ethnographic approaches to health policy. Drawing on the history of critical medical anthropology, the anthropology of policy, and critical policy studies, we show how anthropologies of health policy are particularly essential in this current moment, as policy production becomes increasingly abstracted and even more entwined with specific forms of evidence making. Taken together, the contributors of this special issue argue that anthropology's interventions into health policy are essential in three ways. First, they shed light on the practices of policy 'communities', the pragmatic parameters under which they work, and the central logics under which health policy actors are operating. Second, they examine the effects of policy implementation upon those intended to be the subjects of health policy, highlighting the effects of policy for those marginalised by gender, race, and caste. Here, anthropology provides a view into the 'lived experience' of those targeted by health policy, but it also demands that anthropologists provide 'counter-stories' and 'counter-evidences' that dismantle narrow systems of policy knowledge production. Finally, anthropological attention provides an essential lens into the things that carry over in the act of policy reform-the past reverberations and imperial inheritances. Together with our contributors, we call for anthropologies of health policy that work to highlight and dismantle such inheritances.

What research evidence can support the decolonisation of global health? Making space for deeper scholarship in global health journals

Much of the current global health publishing landscape is restricted in its epistemological diversity, relying heavily on a biomedical lens to examine and report on global health issues. In this Viewpoint, we argue that the space within global health journals needs to be expanded to include diverse forms of research scholarship, thereby shifting the kinds of stories that get told in these spaces. We particularly call for the inclusion of deeper research that values the tacit, experiential knowledge possessed by actors (eg, communities, health-care workers, policy makers, activisits, and researchers) in low-income and middle-income countries, and legitimises the perspectives of local doers and thinkers; research that pays careful attention to context, and does not treat local realities as mere background occurrences; and research that draws on alternative, counter-dominant epistemologies, that allow for the crucial examination of power imbalances, and that challenge hegemonic discourses in global health. To decolonise academic work in the global health field, we should look beyond diversity in research authorship. We need to tackle other unconscious biases such as presumptions about the superiority of particular forms of evidence over others, and thereby expand the plurality of perspectives in global health.

Mistrustful Dependency: Mistrust as Risk Management in an Italian Emergency Department

Mistrust is increasingly a daily reality of healthcare delivery worldwide. Yet it remains understudied as a form of relationship and a force in its own right. I address this gap through the ethnography of an Italian Emergency Department (ED), where conflicts have increased since the 2008 financial crisis. I show how mistrust does not result in a breakdown of healthcare interactions. Rather, mistrust is used in ambivalent care relationships to negotiate the roles, the risks, and the power that patients and staff are willing to entrust to others. Mistrust manifests in risk management strategies within relationships of "mistrustful dependency."

Living through uncertainty: a qualitative study on leadership and resilience in primary healthcare during COVID-19

BACKGROUND

Resilience is often referred to when assessing the ability of health systems to maintain their functions during unexpected events. Primary healthcare forms the basis for the health system and thus its resilient responses are vital for the outcomes of the whole system. Understanding how primary healthcare organisations are able to build resilience before, during, and after unexpected or sudden shocks, is key to public health preparedness. This study aims to identify how leaders responsible for local health systems interpreted changes in their operational environment during the first year of COVID-19, and to elucidate how these views reflect aspects of resilience in healthcare.

METHODS

The data consist of 14 semi-structured individual interviews with leaders of local health systems in Finland representing primary healthcare. The participants were recruited from four regions. An abductive thematic analysis was used to identify entities from the viewpoints of the purpose, resources, and processes of resilience in the healthcare organisation.

RESULTS

Results were summarised as six themes, which suggest that embracing uncertainty is viewed by the interviewees a basis for primary healthcare functioning. Leading towards adaptability was regarded a distinct leadership task enabling the organisation to modify its functions according to demands of the changing operational environment. Workforce, knowledge and sensemaking, as well as collaboration represented what the leaders viewed as the means for achieving adaptability. The ability to adapt functioned to comprehensively meet the population's service needs built on a holistic approach.

CONCLUSIONS

The results showed how the leaders who participated in this study adapted their work during changes brought on by the pandemic, and what they viewed as critical for maintaining organisational resilience. The leaders considered embracing uncertainty as a principal feature of their work rather than viewing uncertainty as aberrant and something to avoid. These notions, along with what the leaders considered as critical means for building resilience and adaptability should be addressed and elaborated in future research. Research on resilience and leadership should be conducted more in the complex context of primary healthcare, where cumulative stresses are encountered and processed continuously.

Power and politics in a pandemic: Insights from Finnish health system leaders during COVID-19

Power and politics are both critical concepts to engage with in health systems and policy research, as they impact actions, processes, and outcomes at all levels in health systems. Building on the conceptualization of health systems as social systems, we investigate how power and politics manifested in the Finnish health system during COVID-19, posing the following research question: in what ways did health system leaders and experts experience issues of power and politics during COVID-19, and how did power and politics impact health system governance? We completed online interviews with health system leaders and experts (n = 53) at the local, regional, and national level in Finland from March 2021 to February 2022. The analysis followed an iterative thematic analysis process in which the data guided the codebook. The results demonstrate that power and politics affected health system governance in Finland during COVID-19 in a multitude of ways. These can be summarized through the themes of credit and blame, frame contestation, and transparency and trust. Overall, political leaders at the national level were heavily involved in the governance of COVID-19 in Finland, which was perceived as having both negative and positive impacts. The politicization of the pandemic took health officials and civil servants by surprise, and events during the first year of COVID-19 in Finland reflect recurring vertical and horizontal power dynamics between local, regional, and national actors. The paper contributes to the growing call for power-focused health systems and policy research. The results suggest that analyses of pandemic governance and lessons learned are likely to leave out critical factors if left absent of an explicit analysis of power and politics, and that such analyses are needed to ensure accountability in health systems.

Health for all? Pasts, presents and futures of aspirations for universal healthcare

In this special issue, we bring together anthropological and historical work that considers successive aspirations towards 'health for all': their pasts, their futures, and their diverse meanings and iterations. Across the world, hopes for providing 'health for all' were central to nation building in the long 20th century, and for international relations, particularly after the second world war and the establishment of the WHO. Health became seen as a fundamental good by citizens of North and South and has remained a central force shaping global and national politics until today. But what does 'health for all' actually mean, and how did it come to matter? In this introduction we approach 'health for all as a situated, multi-faceted phenomenon, that - while having a shared aspiration towards universality of access and equality of care - comes into focus in partial, diverse and contentious policies, programmes, projects and practices. Beyond homogenising narratives that frame 'health for all' in terms of either success or failure, the special issue highlights the diverse iterations that 'health for all' has taken on the ground for different subjects and groups of people, exploring exclusions and limitations as well as dreams and aspirations.

Making morbidity multiple: History, legacies, and possibilities for global health

Multimorbidity has been framed as a pressing global health challenge that exposes the limits of systems organised around single diseases. This article seeks to expand and strengthen current thinking around multimorbidity by analysing its construction within the field of global health. We suggest that the significance of multimorbidity lies not only in challenging divisions between disease categories but also in what it reveals about the culture and history of transnational biomedicine. Drawing on social research from sub-Saharan Africa to ground our arguments, we begin by describing the historical processes through which morbidity was made divisible in biomedicine and how the single disease became integral not only to disease control but to the extension of biopolitical power. Multimorbidity, we observe, is hoped to challenge single disease approaches but is assembled from the same problematic, historically-loaded categories that it exposes as breaking down. Next, we highlight the consequences of such classificatory legacies in everyday lives and suggest why frameworks and interventions to integrate care have tended to have limited traction in practice. Finally, we argue that efforts to align priorities and disciplines around a standardised biomedical definition of multimorbidity risks retracing the same steps. We call for transdisciplinary work across the field of global health around a more holistic, reflexive understanding of multimorbidity that foregrounds the culture and history of translocated biomedicine, the intractability of single disease thinking, and its often-adverse consequences in local worlds. We outline key domains within the architecture of global health where transformation is needed, including care delivery, medical training, the organisation of knowledge and expertise, global governance, and financing.

Reasons for referral and referral compliance among Congolese and Burundian refugees living in Tanzania: a community-based, cross-sectional survey

OBJECTIVES

In order to prevent overburdening of higher levels of care, national healthcare systems rely on processes of referral, including for refugee populations which number 26 million globally. The goal of this study is to use data from a population-based household survey to describe patterns of referral services among a population of Congolese and Burundian refugees living in Tanzania.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional survey using cluster randomised sampling.

SETTING

Nyarugusu refugee camp, Kigoma, Tanzania.

PARTICIPANTS

153 refugees.

PRIMARY OUTCOME

Referral compliance.

SECONDARY OUTCOMES

Proportion of referrals that were surgical; proportion of referrals requiring diagnostic imaging.

RESULTS

Out of 153 individuals who had been told they needed a referral, 96 (62.7%) had gone to the referral hospital. Of the 57 who had not gone, 36 (63%) reported they were still waiting to go and had waited over a month. Of the participants who had been referred (n=96), almost half of the participants reported they were referred for a surgical problem (n=43, 45%) and the majority received radiological testing at an outside hospital (n=72, 75%). Congolese refugees more frequently had physically completed their referral compared with Burundians (Congolese: n=68, 76.4% vs Burundian: n=28, 43.8%, p<0.001). In terms of intracamp referral networks, most refugees reported being referred to the hospital or clinic by a community health worker (n=133, 86.9%).

CONCLUSION

To our knowledge, this is the first community-based study on patterns of referral healthcare among refugees in Tanzania and sub-Saharan Africa. Our findings suggest patients were referred for surgical problems and for imaging, however not all referrals were completed in a timely fashion. Future research should attempt to build prospective referral registries that allow for better tracking of patients and examination of waiting times.