Background: The Family Adoption Programme (FAP) was introduced under Competency-Based Medical Education (CBME) by the National Medical Commission (NMC) to strengthen community-oriented learning among undergraduate medical students.This study explored the perceptions and experiences of undergraduate medical students and faculty members regarding the implementation of the FAP.Methods: A descriptive qualitative study was conducted between April and September 2025 in the Department of Community Medicine at Atal Bihari Vajpayee Government Medical College, Vidisha, India.Purposive sampling was used to recruit 41 participants, including 35 undergraduate medical students and six faculty members.Data collection was continued until the principal investigator (PI) considered that subsequent interviews were no longer generating substantially new codes or thematic insights.This assessment was conducted prospectively during data collection, and recruitment was discontinued once the dataset was considered sufficiently rich to address the study objectives.Results: The analysis generated five themes grouped into two domains.Participants perceived the programme as a valuable experiential learning strategy that provided opportunities for communication development, integration of theoretical knowledge with community practice, early clinical exposure, empathy and professional responsibility, and cultural competence.They also highlighted opportunities for community-oriented learning and professional identity development.Major implementation challenges included transportation constraints, limited human resources, scheduling difficulties, language and cultural barriers, and environmental and safety concerns during field visits.Conclusion: The FAP was perceived by undergraduate medical students and faculty members as providing opportunities for community-based experiential learning and professional development.Participants also identified logistical, institutional, communication, and safety challenges that may affect programme implementation.These findings should be interpreted in the context of the single-institution qualitative design.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Matcha et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: