Adequacy of Institutional Support Systems Available to Mortuary Science Students at the University of Nairobi: A Mixed-methods Study
Jecinta Wambui Waciuri
*
Department of Human Anatomy and Medical Physiology, University of Nairobi, Nairobi, Kenya.
Ronald Omenge Obwoge
Department of Community Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, Egerton University, Njoro, Kenya.
Franklin Boibanda
Department of Medical Education, School of Medicine, College of Health Sciences, Moi University, Eldoret, Kenya.
*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Abstract
Background: Institutional support systems are essential for promoting academic success by providing students with access to learning resources, mentorship, feedback, and psychological support. These systems are particularly important in health professions education, where students face demanding workloads and emotionally challenging environments. Mortuary science students encounter additional pressures owing to cadaver-based training and exposure to death-related situations. However, limited evidence exists regarding the adequacy of institutional support systems for these students in Kenya. This study assessed the adequacy of the institutional support systems available to mortuary science students at the University of Nairobi.
Methods: A descriptive cross-sectional mixed-methods study was conducted among mortuary science students and faculty at the University of Nairobi. Quantitative data were collected using structured questionnaires and analysed using SPSS version 26. Descriptive statistics summarised the institutional support variables. Qualitative data were obtained through focus group discussions and key informant interviews and were analysed thematically.
Results: Cadaveric specimens accounted for the highest proportion of reported learning-resource use (29.5%), followed by library textbooks (26.2%) and online journals (25.9%). Academic advising and mentorship accounted for the largest proportion of reported support-service use (50.0%), whereas counselling services accounted for 12.5%. Verbal feedback during practical sessions was the most common form of feedback (45.0%), although some students reported receiving limited feedback. More than one-quarter of the students were unaware of the available mental health services. The qualitative findings highlighted barriers, including limited awareness, inconsistent feedback, and restricted access to psychosocial support.
Conclusion: Students had access to key academic support systems, but gaps remained in the utilisation of counselling services, awareness of mental health services, and consistency of feedback. Strengthening communication and integrating psychosocial support may improve student outcomes.
Keywords: Institutional support, mortuary science, learning resources, academic mentorship, student support services, health professions education