Community participation in rural primary health care: intervention or approach?
Robyn Preston A , Hilary Waugh A , Sarah Larkins A C and Judy Taylor A BA School of Medicine and Dentistry, James Cook University, Douglas, Qld 4811, Australia.
B Spencer Gulf Rural Health School, University of South Australia and University of Adelaide, Nicolson Avenue, Whyalla-Norrie, SA 5608, Australia.
C Corresponding author. Email: sarah.larkins@jcu.edu.au
Australian Journal of Primary Health 16(1) 4-16 https://doi.org/10.1071/PY09053
Published: 17 March 2010
Abstract
Community participation is considered important in primary health care development and there is some evidence to suggest it results in positive health outcomes. Through a process of synthesising existing evidence for the effectiveness of community participation in terms of health outcomes we identified several conceptual areas of confusion. This paper builds on earlier work to disentangle the conceptual gaps in this area, and clarify our common understanding of community participation. We conducted a research synthesis of 689 empirical studies in the literature linking rural community participation and health outcomes. The 37 final papers were grouped and analysed according to: contextual factors; the conceptual approach to community participation (using a modification of an existing typology); community participation process; level of evidence; and outcomes reported. Although there is some evidence of benefit of community participation in terms of health outcomes, we found only a few studies demonstrating higher levels of evidence. However, it is clear that absence of evidence of effect is not necessarily the same as absence of an effect. We focus on areas of debate and lack of clarity in the literature. Improving our understanding of community participation and its role in rural primary health care service design and delivery will increase the likelihood of genuine community–health sector partnerships and more responsive health services for rural communities.
Abelson J,
Forest PG,
Eyles J,
Casebeer A,
Martin E, Mackean G
(2007) Examining the role of context in the implementation of a deliberative public participation experiment: Results from a Canadian comparative study. Social Science & Medicine 64(10), 2115–2128.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[Verified 25 January 2010]
Jacobs B, Price N
(2006) Improving access for the poorest to public sector health services: insights from Kirivong Operational Health District in Cambodia. Health Policy and Planning 21(1), 27–39.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed |
[Verified 25 January 2010]
Kidane G, Morrow RH
(2000) Teaching mothers to provide home treatment of malaria in Tigray, Ethiopia: a randomised trial. Lancet 356(9229), 550–555.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed |
CAS |
[Verified 25 January 2010]
Parker E,
Meiklejohn B,
Patterson C,
Edwards K, Preece C ,
et al
.
(2006) Our games our health: a cultural asset for promoting health in Indigenous communities. Health Promotion Journal of Australia 17(2), 103–108.
| PubMed |
[Verified 25 January 2010]
Rifkin S
(1986) Lessons from community participation in health programs. Health Policy and Planning 1(3), 240–249.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[Verified 25 January 2010]
Sirivong A,
Silphong B,
Simphaly N,
Phayasane T,
Bonouvong V, Schelp FP
(2003) Advantages of trained TBA and the perception of females and their experiences with reproductive health in two districts of the Luangprabang Province, Lao PDR. The Southeast Asian Journal of Tropical Medicine and Public Health 34(4), 919–928.
| PubMed |
[Verified 1 March 2009]
Zakus J, Lysack C
(1998) Revisiting community participation. Health Policy and Planning 13(1), 1–12.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | PubMed |
CAS |
