Background: During the process of decision-making for long-term care, clients are often dependent on informal support and available information about quality ratings of care services. However, clients do not take ratings into account when considering preferred care, and need assistance to understand their preferences. A tool to elicit preferences for long-term care could be beneficial. Therefore, the aim of this qualitative descriptive study is to understand the user requirements and develop a web-based preference elicitation tool for clients in need of longterm care. Methods: We applied a user-centred design in which end-users influence the development of the tool. The included end-users were clients, relatives, and healthcare professionals. Data collection took place between November 2017 and March 2018 by means of meetings with the development team consisting of four users, walkthrough interviews with 21 individual users, video-audio recordings, field notes, and observations during the use of the tool. Data were collected during three phases of iteration: Look and feel, Navigation, and Content. A deductive and inductive content analysis approach was used for data analysis. Results: The layout was considered accessible and easy during the Look and feel phase, and users asked for neutral images. Users found navigation easy, and expressed the need for concise and shorter text blocks. Users reached consensus about the categories of preferences, wished to adjust the content with propositions about well-being, and discussed linguistic difficulties. Conclusion: By incorporating the requirements of end-users, the user-centred design proved to be useful in progressing from the prototype to the finalized tool ‘What matters to me’. This tool may assist the elicitation of client’s preferences in their search for long-term care.
DOCUMENT
In the course of our supervisory work over the years, we have noticed that qualitative research tends to evoke a lot of questions and worries, so-called frequently asked questions (FAQs). This series of four articles intends to provide novice researchers with practical guidance for conducting high-quality qualitative research in primary care. By ‘novice’ we mean Master’s students and junior researchers, as well as experienced quantitative researchers who are engaging in qualitative research for the first time. This series addresses their questions and provides researchers, readers, reviewers and editors with references to criteria and tools for judging the quality of qualitative research papers. The second article focused on context, research questions and designs, and referred to publications for further reading. This third article addresses FAQs about sampling, data collection and analysis. The data collection plan needs to be broadly defined and open at first, and become flexible during data collection. Sampling strategies should be chosen in such a way that they yield rich information and are consistent with the methodological approach used. Data saturation determines sample size and will be different for each study. The most commonly used data collection methods are participant observation, face-to-face in-depth interviews and focus group discussions. Analyses in ethnographic, phenomenological, grounded theory, and content analysis studies yield different narrative findings: a detailed description of a culture, the essence of the lived experience, a theory, and a descriptive summary, respectively. The fourth and final article will focus on trustworthiness and publishing qualitative research.
DOCUMENT
Background: Goal setting is an essential step in the clinical reasoning process of speech and language therapists (SLTs) who provide care for children, adolescents and adults with communication disorders. In the light of person-centred care, shared or collaborative goal setting between the SLT and client is advised in (inter)national guidelines. SLTs face challenges in implementing (shared) goal setting as theoretical frameworks and practical interventions are scarce and less applicable to use with a wide range of communication vulnerable populations. Aims: A first step in developing theory and practical interventions is to explore first-hand experiences of SLTs and clients about day-to-day goal-setting practice. This study was guided by the following research question:What are the perspectives and needs of SLTs and persons with communication disorders regarding (shared) goal setting in routine SLT services? Methods & Procedures: The qualitative study was carried out in the setting of routine speech–language therapy services in community practices, primary education and neurological rehabilitation in the Netherlands. Data collection followed the principles of video-reflexive ethnography, using video footage of goal-setting conversations to facilitate semi-structured, reflexive interviews.Data analysis was based on reflexive thematic analysis. A total of 12 interviews were conducted with client–SLT dyads, covering perspectives from children, parents and adults with a range of communication difficulties and their SLTs. Outcomes & Results: Data analysis resulted in four themes, of which two contain subthemes. Each theme represents a central organizing concept found in SLT and client interviews. The themes were identified as: (1) goal setting is a complex process; (2) goal talk needs to be communication accessible; (3) communicative participation goals are hard to grasp; and (4) the importance of relationships. Topics such as power imbalance, communication vulnerability, effective communication strategies, and motivation and trust are explored under these themes. Conclusions & Implications: SLTs are encouraged to view shared goal setting as a process that needs to be explicitly planned and communicated with clients regardless of their age or communication vulnerability. SLTs have expert knowledge and skills when it comes to supporting communication and applying these skills during goal talks might strengthen shared goal setting and foster a therapeutic relationship. There is a need to concretely conceptualize and embed shared goal setting in policy and clinical guidelines. The themes reported have tentative clinical implications for developing such policy, and shared goal-setting interventions for SLT practice, under the condition that SLTs and people with communication disorders are continuously involved.
MULTIFILE
