ObjectivesWe sought to characterise the prehospital experience of Tanzanian trauma patients, and identify barriers and facilitators to implement community-based emergency medical systems (EMS).SettingsOur study was conducted in the emergency department of an urban national referral hospital in Tanzania.ParticipantsA convenience sample of 34 adult trauma patients, or surrogate family members, presenting or referred to an urban referral emergency department in Tanzania for treatment of injury, participated in the study.InterventionsParticipation in semistructured, iteratively developed interviews until saturation of responses was reached.OutcomesA grounded theory-based approach to qualitative analysis was used to identify recurrent themes.ResultsWe characterised numerous deficiencies within the existing clinic-to-hospital referral network, including missed/delayed diagnoses, limited management capabilities at pre-referral facilities and interfacility transfer delays. Potential barriers to EMS implementation include patient financial limitations and lack of insurance, limited public infrastructure and resources, and the credibility of potential first aid responders. Potential facilitators of EMS include communities’ tendency to pool resources, individuals’ trust of other community members to be first aid responders, and faith in community leaders to organise EMS response. Participants expressed a strong desire to learn first aid.ConclusionsThe composite themes generated by the data suggest that there are myriad structural, financial, institutional and cultural barriers to the implementation of a formal prehospital system. However, our analysis also revealed potential facilitators to a first-responder system that takes advantage of close-knit local communities and the trust of recognised leaders in society. The results suggest favourable acceptability for community-based response by trained lay people. There is significant opportunity for care improvements with short trainings and low-cost supply planning. Further research looking at the effects of delay on outcomes in this population is needed.

BackgroundIn conflict and disaster settings, medical personnel are exposed to psychological stressors that threaten their wellbeing and increase their risk of developing burnout, depression, anxiety, and PTSD. As lay medics frequently function as the primary health providers in these situations, their mental health is crucial to the delivery of services to afflicted populations. This study examines a population of community health workers in Karen State, eastern Myanmar to explore the manifestations of health providers’ psychological distress in a low-resource conflict environment.MethodsMental health screening surveys were administered to 74 medics, incorporating the 12-item general health questionnaire (GHQ-12) and the posttraumatic checklist for civilians (PCL-C). Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with 30 medics to investigate local idioms of distress, sources of distress, and the support and management of medics’ stressors.ResultsThe GHQ-12 mean was 10.7 (SD 5.0, range 0–23) and PCL-C mean was 36.2 (SD 9.7, range 17–69). There was fair internal consistency for the GHQ-12 and PCL-C (Cronbach’s alpha coeffecients 0.74 and 0.80, respectively) and significant correlation between the two scales (Pearson’s R-correlation 0.47, P<0.001). Qualitative results revealed abundant evidence of stressors, including perceived inadequacy of skills, transportation barriers, lack of medical resources, isolation from family communities, threats of military violence including landmine injury, and early life trauma resulting from conflict and displacement. Medics also discussed mechanisms to manage stressors, including peer support, group-based and individual forms of coping.ConclusionsThe results suggest significant sources and manifestations of mental distress among this under-studied population. The discrepancy between qualitative evidence of abundant stressors and the comparatively low symptom scores may suggest marked mental resilience among subjects. The observed symptom score means in contrast with the qualitative evidence of abundant stressors may suggest the development of marked mental resilience among subjects. Alternatively, the discrepancy may reflect the inadequacy of standard screening tools not validated for this population and potential cultural inappropriateness of established diagnostic frameworks. The importance of peer-group support as a protective factor suggests that interventions might best serve healthworkers in conflict areas by emphasizing community- and team-based strategies.