ABSTRACT
In-depth interviews with Afghan refugees living in The Netherlands about their experience of healthcare, have led to a series of narratives. This article focuses on the relationship between the refugee-patients and their general practitioners (GPs) from the participants' point of view. It was possible to distinguish four different types of narrative, by analysing the individual interviews into critical episodes. Building trust was identified as the crucial issue. A number of possible explanations are given for the differences found. Links are made to participant expectations in respect of health and healthcare and to their personal and social resources. The GP has a key role in the Dutch healthcare system, but is a novel phenomenon for refugees arriving from Afghanistan. The development of a relationship of trust is sometimes compromised by negative personal experience and also by stories relating such experiences circulating in the Afghan community. The elements that constituted positive and negative episodes and led to the development or undermining of trust were identified in the narratives. Negative experience tended to be interpreted as a sign of prejudice on the part of the healthcare professional. The findings of this study are discussed in the wider context of research into patient priorities in general practice.
Subject(s)
Family Practice/standards , Patient Acceptance of Health Care/ethnology , Physician-Patient Relations , Refugees/psychology , Trust , Adult , Afghanistan/ethnology , Aged , Family Practice/methods , Female , Health Services Accessibility , Humans , Interviews as Topic , Male , Middle Aged , Narration , National Health Programs , Netherlands , Patient Acceptance of Health Care/psychology , Sociology, MedicalABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To confront the views of refugee patients and general practitioners in the Netherlands, focusing on medically unexplained physical symptoms (MUPS). METHODS: The study is based on in depth interviews with refugees from Afghanistan (n = 36) and Somalia (n = 30). Additionally, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 24 general practitioners. Text fragments concerning the relationship between mental worries and health or physical ailments were subject of a secondary analysis, the results of which are presented. RESULTS: Medically unexplained physical symptoms were a key issue for both refugees and GPs. The GPs saw MUPS as a significant part of the illness presentation by refugee patients. Refugees felt GPs were often prejudiced, too readily using their difficult background as an explanation for physical symptoms. A 'general narrative' circulating in the refugee communities undermines trust. The GPs applied different strategies in dealing with MUPS presented by their refugee patients. A 'human interest strategy' is distinguished from a 'technical strategy'. The results are discussed in the wider context of the literature on MUPS and patient satisfaction. CONCLUSION: No fundamental difference in paradigms was found between refugees and GPs as to the negative influence worries and bad experiences can have on health. For a fruitful cooperation to develop, based on trust, GPs need to invest in the relationship with individual refugees, and avoid actions based on prejudice. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: The importance of (a lack of) trust is underestimated in medical practice. Phenomena undermining trust are often out of sight for practitioners. Critical reflection is needed on the strategies practitioners employ to deal with MUPS.
