Explaining the experiences of health care providers regarding organizational factors affecting health education: a qualitative study

Abstract

Abstract Background Health education is considered the most important component of primary health care. Paying attention to organizational factors can help to improve the quality of health education. Therefore, the present study was conducted to explain organizational factors affecting health education among health care providers. Method This is a qualitative, descriptive, and phenomenological study that was conducted between 2020 -2022 on 50 health care workers who had been selected by purposeful sampling method in different settings including hospitals, GP office, behavioral disease counseling center, universities, and comprehensive health centers in the south and the center region of Iran. Data were collected by in-depth, semi-structured, and individual interviews, as well as focus group discussion, and continued until data saturation. Data were analyzed by MAXQDA software using qualitative content analysis in three stages: preparation, organization, and reporting. To evaluate the scientific accuracy of the findings in this study, 4 criteria of Lincoln & Guba were used. Results The results revealed that every practice and policy in a health care organization from assessing needs, setting goals, planning activities, implementations and measurement outcome could affect health education practice and subsequently the health of population; nevertheless, the crucial role of health education practice is being neglected in health organizations. Organizational factors affecting health education were classified into three categories of planning, organizing, and also monitoring and evaluating. The category of planning had three subcategories of infrastructure planning, manpower planning, and design and planning for implementation of health education programs. The categories of organizing had two subcategories of coordination between different units of the Minister of Health and coordination between the health sector and other sectors of society. The categories of monitoring and evaluation had three subcategories of proper feedback, bureaucracy system, reward or reinforcement, failure to define health education as part of the job description, and the impact of electronic health records on the quality of evaluation. Conclusion The results offer expertise and preliminary tools to help with evidence-based health education program planning and evaluation. The Support of managers, like providing manpower in accordance with the target population and infrastructure, can improve health education in the health system. In addition, intra- and inter-sectoral coordination at different levels of the health system to implement tailored programs according to the needs of clients by health education professionals, and the use of health education theories seem necessary. It is also recommended to review the monitoring system with appropriate feedback, define health education as a healthy activity, and develop appropriate criteria for better implementation of health education.