RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: During their clinical practice, health Sciences students get acquainted with the cultural diversity of patients and learn to deal with this reality in a model of social learning. AIM: To determine the level of Intercultural Competence in Health Sciences students based on the Confrontation, Resistance, and Cultural Openness (CRAC) model, specific for health professionals. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 106 Health Sciences students from three universities in Chile. Content analysis was supported by the software ATLAS.ti version 9. RESULTS: The students progressed through the CRAC model and were able to configure a new level called Cultural Understanding, in which the participants innovated care models and offered new therapeutic schemes with cultural relevance. In addition, a fifth level called Cultural Inclusion was proposed. However, a training process with a marked theoretical/scientific emphasis can overshadow the learning process resulting from reflexive practical experience, reducing its real value such as traditional/ancestral medicine. CONCLUSIONS: The students were able to update the Confrontation, Resistance, Openness, Understanding and Intercultural Inclusion Model. The features of those participants who achieve the highest levels of intercultural competences should be explored and used for the training process.
Asunto(s)
Humanos , Estudiantes , Comunicación , Personal de Salud , Diversidad Cultural , Competencia Cultural , AprendizajeRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: During their clinical practice, health Sciences students get acquainted with the cultural diversity of patients and learn to deal with this reality in a model of social learning. AIM: To determine the level of Intercultural Competence in Health Sciences students based on the Confrontation, Resistance, and Cultural Openness (CRAC) model, specific for health professionals. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 106 Health Sciences students from three universities in Chile. Content analysis was supported by the software ATLAS.ti version 9. RESULTS: The students progressed through the CRAC model and were able to configure a new level called Cultural Understanding, in which the participants innovated care models and offered new therapeutic schemes with cultural relevance. In addition, a fifth level called Cultural Inclusion was proposed. However, a training process with a marked theoretical/scientific emphasis can overshadow the learning process resulting from reflexive practical experience, reducing its real value such as traditional/ancestral medicine. CONCLUSIONS: The students were able to update the Confrontation, Resistance, Openness, Understanding and Intercultural Inclusion Model. The features of those participants who achieve the highest levels of intercultural competences should be explored and used for the training process.