Abstract
Objectives The objectives of the Rural Site Visit Project (SV Project) were to develop a successful model for engaging all 201 communities in rural British Columbia, Canada, build relationships and gather data about community health care issues to help modify existing rural health care programs and inform government rural health care policy.
Design An adapted version of Boelen’s health partnership model was used to identify each community’s Health Care Partners: health providers, academics, policy makers, health managers, and community representatives. Qualitative data was gathered using a semi-structured interview guide. Major themes were identified through content analysis, and this information was fed back to the government and interviewees in reports every six months.
Setting The 107 communities visited thus far have health care services that range from hospitals with surgical programs to remote communities with no medical services at all. The majority have access to local primary care.
Participants Participants were recruited from the Health Care Partner groups identified above using purposeful and snowball sampling.
Primary and secondary outcome measures A successful process was developed to engage rural communities in identifying their health care priorities, whilst simultaneously building and strengthening relationships. The qualitative data was analysed from 185 meetings in 80 communities and shared with policy makers at governmental and community levels.
Results 36 themes have been identified and three overarching themes that interconnect all the interviews, namely Relationships, Autonomy and Change Over Time, are discussed.
Conclusion The SV Project appears to be unique in that it is physician led, prioritizes relationships, engages all of the health care partners singly and jointly in each community, is ongoing, provides feedback to both the policy makers and all interviewees on a 6-monthly basis and, by virtue of its large scope, has the ability to produce interim reports that have helped support system change.
Article Summary
This study process has adapted Boelen’s health partnership model and is unique in that it is physician led, prioritizes relationships, engages all of the health care partners singly and jointly in each community, is ongoing, provides feedback to both the policy makers and all interviewees on a 6-monthly basis.
A successful method of engaging with rural communities and building relationships and trust across multiple stakeholder groups is described that contributed to influencing positive health care system changes.
As all communities in one province are being visited a picture of rural health care initiatives and challenges is highly comprehensive and therefore able to influence policy.
One of the main limitations in this study is that because the interviewers were experienced health care providers, power differentials may have existed which may have introduced bias in the discussions.
A potential limitation is the enormous amount of data to handle and analyze in a rigorous way, which was mitigated by having two full time analysts working together to ensure consistency with frequent meeting with the research team to consider and agree emerging themes.
Article SummaryHow can rural community-engaged health services planning affect sustainable health care system changes? – A process description and qualitative analysis of data from the Rural Coordination Centre of British Columbia’s Rural Site Visits Project
Competing Interest Statement
Stuart Johnston is funded as a Director of the RCCbc. Erika Belanger and Krystal Wong are full-time employees of the RCCbc. David Snadden was the Inaugural Rural Doctors University of British Columbia (UBC) Chair in Rural Health from 2016 to 2020 which is supported by an endowment to the UBC from the Rural Doctors of BC through the JSC. He also sits on the RCCbc Leadership group to provide an academic perspective. He is fully funded by the Faculty of Medicine at UBC as a Professor of Family Practice. There are no other competing interests.
Clinical Trial
This is not a clinical trial
Funding Statement
This project is supported by funds from the Joint Standing Committee on Rural Issues through funding negotiated through the Ministry of Health and Doctors of BC Physician Master Agreement. Those funds are administered by the Rural Coordination Centre of BC.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The study received harmonized ethics approval from the Behavioral Research Ethics Board of the University of British Columbia. Operational approval was also received from each health authority. Informed consent is collected from all participants.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
The embedded links in the article were disabled when it was transferred to a PDF, so we are reposting a pdf with active links in the hope they will still work
Data Availability
Due to the qualitative nature of the data and the fact that the raw data contains identifying information no data is publicly available
