Family Health Postgraduate Program in the Brazilian northeast: repercussions in the professional exercise of postgraduates

Nuto, Sharmênia de Araújo Soares; Vieira-Meyer, Anya Pimentel Gomes Fernandes; Vieira, Neiva Francenely Cunha; Freitas, Roberto Wagner Júnior Freire de; Amorim, Karla Patrícia Cardoso; Dias, Maria Socorro de Araújo; Vasconcelos, Maristela Inês Osawa; Machado, Maria de Fátima Antero Sousa

doi:10.1590/1413-81232021265.04352021

Sharmênia de Araújo Soares Nuto

Fundação Oswaldo Cruz Ceará (Fiocruz Ceará). R. São José s/n, Precabura. 61760-000 Eusébio CE Brasil. shanuto@gmail.com

http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4763-6773

Anya Pimentel Gomes Fernandes Vieira-Meyer

Fundação Oswaldo Cruz Ceará (Fiocruz Ceará). R. São José s/n, Precabura. 61760-000 Eusébio CE Brasil. shanuto@gmail.com

http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4237-8995

Neiva Francenely Cunha Vieira

Universidade Federal do Ceará. Fortaleza CE Brasil.

http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9622-2462

Roberto Wagner Júnior Freire de Freitas

Fundação Oswaldo Cruz Ceará (Fiocruz Ceará). R. São José s/n, Precabura. 61760-000 Eusébio CE Brasil. shanuto@gmail.com

http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9295-1177

Karla Patrícia Cardoso Amorim

Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte. Natal RN Brasil.

http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4047-6073

Maria Socorro de Araújo Dias

Universidade Estadual Vale do Acaraú. Sobral CE Brasil.

http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7813-547X

Maristela Inês Osawa Vasconcelos

Universidade Estadual Vale do Acaraú. Sobral CE Brasil.

http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1937-8850

Maria de Fátima Antero Sousa Machado

Fundação Oswaldo Cruz Ceará (Fiocruz Ceará). R. São José s/n, Precabura. 61760-000 Eusébio CE Brasil. shanuto@gmail.com

http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2541-8441

Collaborations

SAS Nuto, APGF Vieira-Meyer, NFC Vieira, RWJF Freitas, KPC Amorim, MSA Dias, MIO Vasconcelos and MFAS Machado participated in the design, planning, and data collection, analysis, and interpretation. They also contributed to the elaboration, review, and approval of the final version of the paper.

Chief Editors: Romeu Gomes, Antônio Augusto Moura da Silva

		Class 1		Class 2		Class 3		Total
		n	%	n	%	n	%	n	%
Gender
	Male	11	24.44	6	10.53	32	26.02	49	21.78
	Female	34	75.56	51	89.47	91	73.98	176	78.22
Profession
	Doctor	6	13.33	1	1.75	6	4.88	13	5.78
	Nurse	22	48.89	38	66.67	71	57.72	131	58.22
	Dentist	11	24.44	14	24.56	27	21.95	52	23.11
	Other	6	13.33	4	7.02	19	15.45	29	12.89
Currently working in the SUS
	Yes	38	84.44	54	94.74	118	95.93	210	93.33
	No	7	15.56	3	5.26	5	4.07	15	6.67
Works in another place besides the ESF
	Yes	18	40	20	35.09	56	45.53	94	41.78
	No	10	22.22	20	35.09	40	32.52	70	31.11
	Not applicable	17	37.78	17	29.82	27	21.95	61	27.11
Professional relationship with the ESF
	Tenured	23	51.11	38	66.67	83	67.48	144	64
	Contracted	4	8.89	1	1.75	10	8.13	15	6.67
	Consolidated Labor Laws (CLT)	1	2.22	1	1.75	2	1.63	4	1.78
	No relationship			1	1.75	1	0.81	2	0.89
	Other			2	3.51	5	4.07	7	3.11
	Not applicable	17	37.78	14	24.56	22	17.89	53	23.56
Activity individual most identifies with
	ESF	24	53.33	34	59.65	80	65.04	138	61.33
	Municipal/State Management	9	20.00	9	15.79	19	15.45	37	16.44
	Teaching	11	24.44	11	19.3	12	9.76	34	15.11
	SUS Hospital	1	2.22	3	5.26	8	6.5	12	5.33
	Other					4	3.25	4	1.78
Master's Conclusion Paper (TCM) has been published in scientific journals or books
	Yes	26	57.78	28	49.12	23	18.7	77	34.22
	No	19	42.22	29	50.88	100	81.3	148	65.78
Was your TCM presented, in any way, to the population, the Family Health team, or management?
	Yes	23	48.89	38	66.67	58	47.15	119	52.89
	No	22	51.11	19	33.33	65	52.85	106	47.11
Did the theme of your TCM originate from a question/problem related to the Family Health Strategy practice?
	Yes	40	88.89	50	87.72	105	85.37	195	86.67
	Partly	4	8.89	7	12.28	16	13.01	27	12
	No	1	2.22	0	0	2	1.63	3	1.33
Your TCM collaborated in improving the health service
	Yes	22	48.89	36	63.16	78	63.41	136	60.44
	Partly	17	37.78	17	29.82	38	30.89	72	32
	No	6	13.33	4	7.02	7	5.69	17	7.56
Did you find it difficult to use the knowledge developed by your TCM in your workplace?
	Yes	5	11.11	4	7.02	23	18.7	32	14.22
	Partly	9	20.00	12	21.05	16	13.01	37	16.44
	No	31	68.89	41	71.93	84	68.29	156	69.33

Competencies	Class 1			Class 2			Class 3			Total (Todas as Turmas)
	Developed	Currently realizing	p^* * Paired T-test - Developed vs currently realizing.	Developed	Currently realizing	p^* * Paired T-test - Developed vs currently realizing.	Developed	Currently realizing	p^* * Paired T-test - Developed vs currently realizing.	Desenvolveu	Está realizando	p^* * Paired T-test - Developed vs currently realizing.
	Mean (SD)	Mean (SD)	p^* * Paired T-test - Developed vs currently realizing.	Mean (SD)	Mean (SD)	p^* * Paired T-test - Developed vs currently realizing.	Mean (SD)	Mean (SD)	p^* * Paired T-test - Developed vs currently realizing.	Média (DP)	Média (DP)	p^* * Paired T-test - Developed vs currently realizing.
Professional performance in the perspective of comprehensiveness and humanization	4.67 (0.52)	4.70 (0.46)	0.5697	4.79 (0.45)	4.82 (0.38)	0.5318	4.65 (0.71)	4.61 (0.64)	0.5173	4.69 (0.62)	4.68 (0.55)	0.9118
Use of scientific methods for the elaboration of a research or intervention project	4.38 (0.72)	4.09 (0.84)	0.0309	4.44 (0.71)	4.26 (0.92)	0.0316	4.45 (0.76)	4.01 (1.05)	0.0001	4.44 (0.74)	4.09 (0.98)	<0.0001
Developing health education activities	4.73 (0.50)	4.60 (0.63)	0.2003	4.75 (0.43)	4.61 (0.66)	0.109	4.63 (0.72)	4.34 (0.89)	0.0004	4.68 (0.61)	4.46 (0.80)	<0.0001
Production and use of health information	4.49 (0.63)	4.40 (0.72)	0.4857	4.60 (0.62)	4.36 (0.80)	0.0081	4.44 (0.76)	4.17 (0.93)	0.0031	4.49 (0.70)	4.26 (0.86)	0.0002
Realizing care and care management	4.49 (0.69)	4.48 (0.74)	0.8443	4.61 (0.62)	4.56 (0.66)	0.103	4.46 (0.75)	4.33 (0.76)	0.0916	4.54 (0.70)	4.42 (0.74)	0.0336
Realizing the management of the work process	4.51 (0.66)	4.43 (0.85)	0.456	4.61 (0.62)	4.52 (0.76)	0.1821	4.41 (0.80)	4.33 (0.85)	0.2713	4.48 (0.73)	4.40 (0.83)	0.0794
Planning and evaluating actions	4.38 (0.75)	4.32 (0.74)	0.6427	4.63 (0.55)	4.43 (0.78)	0.0172	4.40 (0.72)	4.13 (0.98)	0.0013	4.45 (0.69)	4.24 (0.89)	0.0001
Developing preceptorship activity in health services	4.04 (1.00)	4.16 (1.21)	0.7289	4.58 (0.68)	4.27 (1.22)	0.0042	3.96 (1.22)	3.83 (1.34)	0.0588	4.13 (1.09)	4.02 (1.29)	0.0059
Coordinating and implementing interprofessional actions	4.42 (0.78)	4.45 (0.73)	0.9999	4.62 (0.62)	4.62 (0.59)	0.9999	4.55 (0.80)	4.26 (0.97)	0.0005	4.54 (0.75)	4.39 (0.86)	0.0021
Interdisciplinary team work	4.62 (0.58)	4.55 (0.63)	0.3229	4.70 (0.57)	4.66 (0.61)	0.4435	4.61 (0.70)	4.34 (0.94)	0.0034	4.64 (0.64)	4.47 (0.82)	0.0015
Effective interpersonal relationship	4.71 (0.55)	4.62 (0.61)	0.2527	4.75 (0.47)	4.74 (0.55)	0.7843	4.65 (0.69)	4.61 (0.66)	0.4076	4.69 (0.62)	4.64 (0.63)	0.2107
Adequate communication with users or the work team	4.73 (0.54)	4.64 (0.53)	0.2528	4.75 (0.51)	4.77 (0.54)	0.7989	4.63 (0.66)	4.64 (0.59)	0.759	4.68 (0.60)	4.67 (0.57)	0.9045

Did your master's degree in family health help you develop this series of competencies?	Class 1	Class 2	Class 3	Total	p^* * One way ANOVA test.
	Mean (SD)	Mean (SD)	Mean (SD)	Mean (SD)	p^* * One way ANOVA test.

1. Possibility of change: Enable individuals, groups, communities or organizations to build capacity for action to promote health, and thus improve health and reduce health inequalities.	4.44 (0.62)	4.67 (0.55)	4.42 (0.76)	4.49 (0.69)	0.0768
2. Health advocacy: Claim with and on behalf of individuals, communities, and organizations to improve health, well-being, and training for health promotion action.	4.31 (0.82)	4.53 (0.76)	4.37 (0.79)	4.39 (0.79)	0.3261
3. Partnership: Work in collaboration with areas of knowledge/disciplines, sectors, and partners to increase the impact and sustainability of health promotion actions.	4.42 (0.72)	4.61 (0.59)	4.31 (0.88)	4.41 (0.79)	0.0543
4. Communication: Communicate health promotion actions effectively, using appropriate techniques and technologies for different audiences.	4.40 (0.78)	4.72 (0.53)	4.45 (0.69)	4.51 (0.68)	0.0249
5. Leadership: Contribute to the development of a shared vision and strategic directions for health promotion action.	4.44 (0.72)	4.63 (0.52)	4.41 (0.79)	4.48 (0.72)	0.1621
6. Diagnosis: Diagnose the needs and potential partnership with social actors/partners in the context of political, economic, social, cultural, environmental, behavioral, and biological determinants that promote or compromise health.	4.47 (0.73)	4.60 (0.53)	4.43 (0.77)	4.48 (0.71)	0.3423
7. Planning: Develop health promotion goals and objectives that can be measured, based on the diagnosis of needs and potentialities in partnership with the actors/social partners.	4.42 (0.75)	4.61 (0.53)	4.34 (0.83)	4.43 (0.75)	0.0774
8. Implementation: Implement effective, efficient, culturally sensitive and ethical health promotion actions, in partnership with the actors / social partners.	4.33 (0.77)	4.54 (0.54)	4.34 (0.79)	4.39 (0.73)	0.1887
9. Evaluation and research: Use appropriate evaluation and research methods in partnership with social actors/partners to determine the scope, impact, and effectiveness of health promotion actions.	4.24 (0.88)	4.47 (0.60)	4.31 (0.82)	4.34 (0.79)	0.287

[1] Collaborations

SAS Nuto, APGF Vieira-Meyer, NFC Vieira, RWJF Freitas, KPC Amorim, MSA Dias, MIO Vasconcelos and MFAS Machado participated in the design, planning, and data collection, analysis, and interpretation. They also contributed to the elaboration, review, and approval of the final version of the paper.

Brasil

Brasil

Family Health Postgraduate Program in the Brazilian northeast: repercussions in the professional exercise of postgraduates

Abstract