Abstract
Background The training of healthcare professionals impacts the health of individuals with intellectual disabilities (ID). This study presents an analysis of how medical students at the University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa, are trained to treat this marginalised population.
Methods This was an exploratory qualitative study using multiple methodologies, including a curricular review, 18 purposively selected key informants’ interviews, and 3 focus group discussions, with medical students across 4 relevant teaching departments. Using Lennox and Diggens’ curricular framework, thematic content analysis was conducted to identify dominant themes and subthemes.
Results Of Lennox and Diggens’ 15-point model of knowledge, skills, and attitudes, 3 aspects were not taught, and attitudes fared the most poorly whereas skills fared the strongest. Differences in the quality and nature of training offered on clinical rotations were highlighted, and the practical exposure to patients with ID was found to be limited.
Conclusions The shortfalls in content and unplanned clinical exposure suggest that a more focused teaching approach to people with ID will result in greater competence and confidence in graduates.
Author note
The results are part of a Master in Public Health project. In the absence of institutional funding for this study, there is no restriction on free access to or publication of this paper.
Acknowledgements
This study was conducted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master in Public Health (MPH) undertaken by Annemarie van Wieringen. This publication was facilitated by funding from SPARC (Strategic Planning and Allocation of Resources) of the University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg. The authors would like to acknowledge all study participants for their insightful contributions. We would also like to thank Professor Laetitia Rispel, the Head of the School of Public Health, for her support and for organising a student–supervisor boot-camp in the Wits School of Public Health and internal reviewers to comment on the early drafts of this paper.
Conflicts of interest: None.