Since the first documented medical mission of Doctor Peter Parker in 1834 to China, the practice and study of medical missions have gained prominence. Despite the increasing prevalence of medical missions, significant ambiguity surrounds their definitions, benefits, and challenges.

This study investigates the effectiveness of regular Short-Term Humanitarian Missions (STMMs) focusing on the Mission of Hope (MoHope) III conducted in the Kyangwali refugee settlement in Uganda.

A qualitative case study approach was employed, utilizing semi-structured interviews and focus group discussions (FGDs) to gather insights from participants, including volunteers and beneficiaries. Data collection adhered to the Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research (SRQR), and thematic analysis was conducted using Clarke and Braun’s approach. Ethical considerations were strictly followed, ensuring participant confidentiality and informed consent.

Analysis of data from 16 participants revealed six emergent themes: barriers (financial constraints, health information flow, infrastructure, etc.) benefits (quality improvement, capacity building, etc.), doubts (sustainability, patient rights, etc.), requirements (decolonization, training, etc.), and new paradigm. Participants highlighted significant obstacles that hinder the effectiveness of STMMs, while also recognizing the added value these missions provide to local healthcare systems.

Regular STMMs, such as MoHope III, can enhance healthcare delivery in low-resource settings, but face numerous challenges that must be addressed for sustained impact. Recommendations include improving infrastructure, ensuring better financial support, and fostering local staff training. This study contributes valuable insights into the complexities of implementing effective STMMs in similar contexts, contributing to the broader discourse on the efficacy and sustainability of short-term medical missions.