Critical Medical Anthropology--a voice for just and equitable healthcare.

The article presents a paradigm current in contemporary medical anthropology - Critical Medical Anthropology (CMA), which merges political-economic approaches with a culturally sensitive analysis of human behaviour grounded in anthropological methods. It is characterized by a strongly applied orientation and a devotion to improving population health and promoting health equity. The beginning of CMA dates back to the 1970s when the interdisciplinary movement called the political economy of health was developed. Today, CMA has grown into one of three major perspectives used in anthropological research devoted to health, illness and wellbeing. The author discusses the origins, key concepts and CMA's usefulness for social research, and its significance for the design of effective policies in the realm of public health. Examplary interventions and ethnographic researches are introduced and wider usage is advocated of such works and methods by bureaucrats and medical staff for understanding the patients' behavior, and the influence of social, economic and political factors on the workings of particular health systems.

Barriers to implementing the DSM-5 cultural formulation interview: a qualitative study.

The Outline for Cultural Formulation (OCF) in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM-IV) marked an attempt to apply anthropological concepts within psychiatry. The OCF has been criticized for not providing guidelines to clinicians. The DSM-5 Cultural Issues Subgroup has since converted the OCF into the Cultural Formulation Interview (CFI) for use by any clinician with any patient in any clinical setting. This paper presents perceived barriers to CFI implementation in clinical practice reported by patients (n = 32) and clinicians (n = 7) at the New York site within the DSM-5 international field trial. We used an implementation fidelity paradigm to code debriefing interviews after each CFI session through deductive content analysis. The most frequent patient threats were lack of differentiation from other treatments, lack of buy-in, ambiguity of design, over-standardization of the CFI, and severity of illness. The most frequent clinician threats were lack of conceptual relevance between intervention and problem, drift from the format, repetition, severity of patient illness, and lack of clinician buy-in. The Subgroup has revised the CFI based on these barriers for final publication in DSM-5. Our findings expand knowledge on the cultural formulation by reporting the CFI's reception among patients and clinicians.