ArticleBMC health services research2024
A look back at the strike by Mozambican doctors in 2013: what can we learn?
Article in BMC health services research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe occurrence of strikes in the health sector has been an increasing concern around the world, given their negative impact on the provision of services and care to patients. The Mozambican doctors' strike in 2013 2013 is considered by many to be the largest of a kind in the country's history, and marked the changes which are still a matter of debate. The aim of this study is to understand the causes, strategies and perceived impact of this strike from the perspective of the main actors involved, taking a look back at everything that happened, including the backstage and tense moments during the negotiations. These details have been little covered in similar studies and are important for a better understanding and management of this type of movement.
methodsThis is a qualitative study with a phenomelogical approach that consisted of semi-structured interviews with the main players involved in the strike movement, and analysis of documents produced around this movement. Non-probabilistic snowball sampling was used to select participants until data saturation was reached. The interviews were transcribed and imported into Nvivo version 12, and the data was analysed using content analysis to identify themes related to the research questions.
resultsThe doctors were demanding better salaries, career prospects and working conditions. Failure to fulfil agreements, threats from the government and a lack of communication are believed to have precipitated the strike. Faced with staff shortages, the government restricted services, prioritised urgent cases, and patients saw services slowed down, their care delayed, a lack of medicines in health units and a loss of confidence in the healthcare system. Although the strike contributed to the approval of the Doctors' Statute, it led to the interruption of postgraduate studies, transfers and suspensions of professionals.
conclusionThe strike was motivated by aspects associated with salaries and working conditions. Some of the approaches adopted further distanced the parties and delayed consensus. The strike had negative consequences for everyone, especially patients. This study provides important lessons for improving strike prevention and management strategies in the health sector.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.