ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To explore caregivers' perspectives on complementary feeding in rural and urban areas of Central Java, Indonesia. DESIGN: A qualitative comparative study using in-depth interviews. We applied thematic analysis to identify themes and subthemes and presented representative quotes. SETTING: Rural and urban villages in Central Java Province, Indonesia. PARTICIPANTS: 46 mothers and grandmothers of 6- to 23-month-old children. FINDINGS: We identified five themes: 1) timing of food introduction, 2) types of complementary foods, 3) meal preparations, 4) complementary food benefits, and 5) expectations toward complementary foods. While caregivers in urban areas had more favourable perceptions of complementary feeding, some misperceptions existed regarding complementary feeding in both areas. These misconceptions included the age of complementary food introduction, the delay in introducing animal-source foods, and the emphasis on any food the child preferred as long as they ate rather than on healthy food choices. KEY CONCLUSIONS: There were similarities and differences in complementary feeding perspectives between caregivers in rural and urban areas. Therefore, policymakers and public health workers should design interventions to enhance complementary feeding practices by addressing the contextual issues in specific settings.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Clinical education in some countries applies a hospital-based learning approach where each student rotates to one division to another division (call of shifting). However, for clinical midwifery education in Indonesia each student remains in a community midwifery clinic (call of nonshifting). Because of the differences in the shifting system used, the question of "How is feedback in the nonshifting context of the clinical midwifery education being given?" needs to be explored. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a mixed methods study and was carried out in a School of Midwifery in Indonesia during 2014 and 2015. We explored the supervisors' and students' perception on the feedback delivery. Students' perceptions were collected through focus group discussions whereas supervisors' perceptions were recorded through interviews. The quality of feedback was observed using a checklist. Qualitative data were analyzed using Atlas Ti and quantitative data were analyzed using a descriptive statistic method. RESULTS: From the qualitative data, students and supervisors perceived their feedback as "more intensive." They reported authenticity in the monitoring and feedback from the day-to-day delivery of patient care with their supervisors. Students and supervisors also described their feedback as "more integrated." The feedback process stimulated students to value history taking, physical examination, and midwifery care. On the other hand, quantitative data from observations presented that "intensive and integrated feedback" were not supported by the quality of the feedback based on literature of the theory of facilitating learning (the mean was 4.67 on a scale of 0-9). CONCLUSIONS: The nonshifting clinical midwifery education can be a better alternative for facilitating the process of providing integrated and intensive feedback. To improve the quality of the feedback, training on providing feedback in a nonshifting context is fundamental in Indonesia.
