Perceptions and efficiency of short-term medical aid missions among key groups of health professionals.

This study investigated the perceptions of short-term assignments of medical services among participating health care professionals dispatched from Taiwan to underdeveloped areas. Structured questionnaires were mailed to four groups of professionals (physicians, pharmacists, nurses, and public health personnel) who had participated in any of 88 medical missions dispatched to 24 allied nations. A total of 278 returns were valid for analysis. Among them, 222 respondents reported that they had participated in just one overseas medical mission (79.9%). The majority of physicians, pharmacists, and nurses listed humanitarianism as their foremost incentive for participation. In contrast, public health personnel most frequently reported that they had been assigned to the mission abroad. Pharmacists, nurses, and public health personnel most commonly stated that their top goal was health care; but physicians said that aiding Taiwan's diplomatic relations was their main motive. While all groups generally recognized language proficiency and cultural awareness as important for conducting successful short-term medical aid missions (STMMs), many members of groups did not rate their own capabilities in those area as sufficient, especially pharmacists (p < .001). Orientation for participants and training for local health workers were seen as relatively insufficient. In conclusion, there are considerable differences in the thoughts about STMMs across four key groups of heath personnel. The findings can help inform efforts to integrate evidence into the deployment of STMMs.

A comparative study of Taiwan's short-term medical missions to the South Pacific and Central America.

BACKGROUND: Taiwan has been dispatching an increasing number of short-term medical missions (STMMs) to its allied nations to provide humanitarian health care; however, overall evaluations to help policy makers strengthen the impact of such missions are lacking. Our primary objective is to identify useful strategies by comparing STMMs to the South Pacific and Central America. METHODS: The data for the evaluation come from two main sources: the official reports of 46 missions to 11 countries in Central America and 25 missions to 8 countries in the South Pacific, and questionnaires completed by health professionals who had participated in the above missions. In Central America, STMMs were staffed by volunteer health professionals from multiple institutions. In the South Pacific, STMMs were staffed by volunteer health professionals from single institutions. RESULTS: In comparison to STMMs to Central America, STMMs to the South Pacific accomplished more educational training for local health providers, including providing heath-care knowledge and skills (p<0.05), and training in equipment administration (p<0.001) and drug administration (p<0.005). In addition, language constraints were more common among missions to Central America (p<0.001). There was no significant difference in the performance of clinical service between the two regions. CONCLUSIONS: Health-care services provided by personnel from multiple institutions are as efficient as those from single institutions. Proficiency in the native language and provision of education for local health-care workers are essential for conducting a successful STMM. Our data provide implications for integrating evidence into the deployment of STMMs.