Diversity training for health professionals: Preparedness to competently address intellectual disability in the Western Cape Province, South Africa.

Diversity training for health professionals in South Africa has traditionally been conceptualized as differences in gender, race or ethnicity, culture and sexual orientation. More recently physical disability and mental illness was included as a dimension. Intellectual disabilities received lip service as a diversity concern. This paper reports on health professionals' perceptions of the extent to which diversity training prepared them to competently deal with intellectual disabilities. This explorative study included a purposive sample of 18 health care professionals experienced in intellectual disability services. Two focus groups were facilitated over three sessions. Transcripts were analysed thematically. Health professionals felt inadequately prepared to consider intellectual disabilities as a diversity issue. They could not effectively advocate for reasonable accommodation. There was a differential familiarity with issues related to diversity and intellectual disability with profession constituting an additional intersecting dimension of diversity. Health professions did not perceive their diversity training to prepare them to deal competently with intellectual disabilities.

An exploration of the impact of COVID-19 on mental health in South Africa.

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, South Africa implemented a strict stay-at-home order. The mental health effects of the pandemic and related containment measures are minimally documented in this region. This study examines the association between COVID-19 related stressors and mental health during a strict stay-at-home order in South Africa. A total of 860 self-selected participants residing in the Western Cape province completed an online survey from 20-31 May 2020. This sample consisted mainly of higher socioeconomic and higher educated segments of the population. Structural equation modelling was used to assess how sociodemographic factors, membership of vulnerable groups and COVID-19 related stressors were associated with PHQ-9 (depression) and GAD-7 (anxiety) scores. 46.0% and 47.2% of participants met the diagnostic threshold of anxiety and depressive disorder, respectively. Considerable daily life repercussions were linked to these scores. Among these participants, less than 20% consulted a formal practitioner and this was 12% for participants without a pre-existing mental health condition. Distress related to containment measures and distress about being infected were significantly associated with more anxiety and depressive symptoms. Having a pre-existing mental health condition was associated with poorer mental health, but being an active health worker was not. Younger age, being female, and living in a non-rural area were associated with poorer mental health. Our findings suggest a considerable mental health impact of this pandemic and related containment measures, but low attendance of mental health services. The accessibility to tailored mental health support is essential under these circumstances, especially for vulnerable groups.

Applying the ICF codes, flag model and C-OAR-SE in the development of return-to-work assessment scale for stroke survivors.

BACKGROUND: The Return-to-Work Assessment Scale (RAS) was developed in 2021 by Ibikunle et al. to assess return-to-work among post-stroke survivors. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to describe how the conceptual (flag model and ICF) and theoretical framework (C-OAR-SE) were used in developing the RAS. METHOD: The development of the RAS consisted of three phases: (i) Initial item generation (ii) Face and content validity (iii) Psychometric testing. With each phase embracing the flag model, international classification of functioning, disability and health (ICF) and the C-OAR-SE an acronym for the six aspects of the theory: 'C' [construct definition], 'OAR' [object representation, attribute classification, and rater entity identification], and 'SE' [selection of item type and answer scale, as well as, enumeration]. RESULTS: A triangulated approach drawn on three separate theories and models. Phase one was developed by using the flag model which provided the semi-structured open ended questions that materialized into the draft instrument while phases two and three were developed using the ICF and the C-OAR-SE. The scale consists of two sections, A and B. Section A comprises general information about post-stroke survivors, which would not be scored, while section B includes three parts that are important to consider when deciding to return-to-work. CONCLUSION: An instrument called RAS was developed, an excellent, internally consistent, as well as reliable tool that has demonstrated good group and structural validity.

Validation of content and structure of the Return-to-work assessment for post-stroke survivors.

Background: Validation of an instrument consist of three main types: content, criterion and construct. Content validity needs to be determined in order for an instrument to be acceptable for use, validity establishes the fact that an instrument measures exactly what it proposes to measure. The Return-to-work assessment scale (RAS) was developed to measure three aspects of return to work: (Personal factors and/or issues, work issues and contextual factors) in 2021. Objective: To report on the processes followed in establishing the face and content validity of the RAS. Method: Twenty participants took part in our study, they were selected purposively and conveniently from a pool of professionals and post stroke survivors. The Delphi survey technique was used to arrive at consensus and professional opinion on the items included in the RAS. Consensus was sought on the items, domains and subdomains included in the RAS that was used to assess return-to-work after a stroke. Our study was concluded after the third round. Result: One item was remove out of the original 86, three (3) domains made up of eleven (11) subdomains were retained. The RAS had consensus of 100% after three rounds of scrutiny for all items. Conclusion: The RAS was found to be valid, thereby establishing its face and content validity. Clinical implication: The RAS is valid and was recommended for psychometric testing which was the next stage after face and content validity.

Non-cognitive Support for Postgraduate Studies: A Systematic Review.

Retention of postgraduate students is a complex problem at higher education institutions. To address this concern, various forms of academic support are offered by higher education institutions to nurture and develop the pipeline of postgraduate students. The support provided to postgraduate students tends to emphasize academic support at times at the expense of psychosocial or non-academic support. Non-cognitive skills were underscored as integral to determining academic and employment outcomes and thus, may need to be investigated more. This manuscript reports on an attempt to filter and consolidate the literature reporting on interventions for postgraduate students that include the development of non-cognitive skills. A systematic review was conducted, because it enabled rigorous and replicable process of consolidating literature. Covidence software was used as a digital platform for the systematic review. The review was conducted at four levels as per the PRISMA guideline namely, identification, screening, eligibility and final summation. The filtration process attempted to answer the following research questions: (1) How are non-cognitive factors or skills defined? (2) Which non-cognitive skills were included in support for postgraduate (Masters and Doctoral) students in the higher education setting?, and (3) How have non-cognitive skills been included in support interventions provided to retain postgraduate students? Descriptive and theory explicative metasynthesis was used for the summation and data extraction. The primary finding was that the term non-cognitive was not used explicitly in the included studies to describe skills or factors supporting student retention. The discourse centered around support and social support as non-academic factors and skills. This suggested that non-cognitive skills were constructed as co-curricular and not integrated into the postgraduate academic project or core learning outcomes. The findings highlighted the distinction between non-cognitive skills and factors and illustrated how skills and factors operate at different levels with different spheres of influence. The formats of support provide an intersectional space where skills and factors are combined.