• No se han encontrado resultados

3.2 PARÁMETROS A CONTROLAR

3.2.3 CUARTO OSCURO Y PROCESADORA

A semi-structured telephone interview was chosen as the most suitable method of

capturing the health experiences of travellers abroad, to compare with the content

of their pre-travel consultation. Whereas the video consultation represents the

pre-travel part of the participants’ pathway, and the diary represents their during-

travel pathway, the telephone interview completes the cycle of their health

experiences by exploring the post-travel pathway. The aim of the interview

method was to answer three aspects of the research questions:

1. How did the participant use (or disregard) the contents of their pre-travel

consultation?

2. What coping or prevention strategies did participants use to manage their

health?

3. How did they acquire that knowledge, skill or attitude?

This will contribute to the knowledge of health issues from travellers’ perspectives,

a concept that is currently fragmented and poorly understood within the literature.

Interviews with travellers offered an opportunity to check the validity of the

researcher’s findings and interpretations of the consultation recordings and diaries

used in methods three and four. The semi-structured interview met a need of the

research to explore themes arising from previous methods, yet allow for new,

perhaps unanticipated concepts to be aired. Careful design, administration and

1997). By loosely following an interview schedule the researcher can gain specific

data to answer the research questions, but is also free to explore arising topics in

depth, and to encourage the participant to talk about the factors that were

important to them. The research participant is therefore active in jointly setting the

agenda, although it is acknowledged that this is within the parameters set by the

researcher (Clarke, 1999). Emerging themes can be compared with those arising

from the wider literature, the documents analysed in method one, and themes

emerging from previous methods. Other advantages include potential access to

emotions, experiences and feelings, an access point to sensitive issues, and the

production of data that Denscombe (2003) refers to as ‘privileged information’,

which might not be available through any other means of data collection.

However, the apparent simplicity of recording a structured ‘conversation’ is a

potential hazard for researchers, requiring careful planning and constant

awareness of the sensitive and complex paths of human interaction. The risks of

getting it wrong include the production of poor and invalid data, and negative

impacts upon participants (e.g. a sense of invaded privacy, or wasted time). There

are other factors affecting the nature and progress of an interview that might not

always be apparent, and yet exert an influence upon the results. These include

age, gender, social and ethnic differences between the researcher and the

participant. To counteract this, Denscombe (2003) suggests the researcher

adopts a passive and neutral manner, including their dress and appearance,

although this can be contested: what is ‘neutral’ to one person, for instance a grey

suit, is loaded with authoritarian values to another individual. Although such visual

cues are absent from telephone interviewing, the voice and accent cannot be

considered ‘neutral’, as Denscombe would imply. Ethical boundaries also need to

with a participant’s viewpoint, which could risk appearing antagonistic or partial.

The interpersonal skills required by the researcher are manifold, and well

documented elsewhere (Parahoo, 1997; Cormack, 2000; Sim and Wright, 2000;

Denscombe, 2003). The salient skills needed within these interviews include:

• attentiveness

• the appropriate management of silences

• the use and timing of prompts and probes

• using paraphrasing or mirroring of what the participant has said in

order to check understanding of their intended meaning

• clarifying information and seeking examples

• avoiding leading questions

• the purposeful use of open or closed questions.

Participants may feel awkward or intimidated knowing the discussion is being

recorded, and the researcher has an ethical duty to allow time to put the

participant at ease, to explain how confidentiality and anonymity will be

maintained, and to avoid coercion (Oliver, 2003).

The possible advantages of conducting a face-to-face interview over a telephone

interview include the ability to pick up on non-verbal cues by the participant. On

balance, this was considered to be relatively less of an advantage in this phase of

the study than the practical benefits offered by the telephone technique. As

written, informed consent had already been achieved when first meeting the

participant at the surgery, continuing consent was checked verbally at the start of

the telephone interview. This method also enhanced the ability of the researcher

to conduct the interview at a time that was most convenient for the participant,

pragmatic considerations must be balanced with methodological rigour in a single-

handed, self-funded study such as this PhD.

Sampling and recruitment

The sample set were the same travellers who consulted with practice nurses in

the AV recordings and completed travellers’ diaries (n = 32).

Tools and piloting

The design of the interview schedule was informed by several factors relating to

the content, the order of questioning, and interviewing techniques. The content

and choice of topics arose from the literature and findings and interpretations from

previous methods. Findings and themes from the video-recorded consultation

(method three) and the traveller’s diary (method four), also contributed to question

formation in the interview schedule, e.g. whether products recommended by the

nurse were used. Findings from the official guidance documents were influential in

deciding on interview topics, and the schedule reflects their key categories such

as infectious disease prevention, bite protection, food and water hygiene, and sun

exposure.

The logical ordering of topics was derived from the literature on patient education

and communication skills – for instance, the requirement to move from simple to

complex issues, neutral to potentially invasive or embarrassing topics, is

propounded by various authors (Nelson-Jones, 1996; Burnard, 1999; Quinn,

2000; and Redman, 2001).

Interviewing techniques (such as managing silence, or the use of closed or open

questions), are well articulated in research literature (Parahoo, 1997; Bowling,

2002; Weinberg, 2002). These were applied and checked in the pilot study and as

Appendix 8 contains the generic interview tool, but there were slight variations

during data collection because the semi-structured nature of the design allowed

participants to develop lines of discussion relevant to their experiences. For

instance, the interview tool contains lists of possible topics to discuss, e.g. malaria

prevention. If the participant had not visited a malarial region, this question was

omitted.

The design of the interview schedule applied the following principles:

• An introductory phase to establish the ground rules for the interview;

• An ice-breaking phase to set the participant at ease and to start the interview

process;

• The main questioning phase, moving from simple to complex, non-threatening

topics to potentially more sensitive ones (e.g. discussion of sunburn came

before diarrhoea, and diarrhoea before sexual health), unless the participant

freely changed this taxonomy of questioning;

• A clarification phase: the participant was invited to offer any further topics that

had not been discussed, or to ask questions. The researcher summarised their

understanding of the main issues and checked for accuracy with the

participant;

• A closure phase for the researcher to thank the participant for their time,

confirm arrangements for feedback and provision of a book token.

The interview schedule, equipment and technique were piloted on two travellers

who were not included in the final sample. The following changes were made as a

• Electronic feedback problems were eliminated by re-positioning the recorder

further away from the telephone;

• Reflexive separation of the roles of nurse and researcher within the principal

investigator. There was a temptation to ask the traveller about their health, as if

they were consulting with the investigator as a nurse. The pilot recordings

honed the interview technique to avoid blurring these roles;

• Questions were added to the interview schedule to facilitate greater depth of

answers, to ask about perceptions of risk, and to align the questions with the

categories of risk identified through the documentary analysis.

Data collection and analysis

Data collection took place between September 2007 and July 2008. Travellers

received a pre-arranged telephone call at a time and number preferred by the

participant, and at the researcher’s expense. This was timed to be approximately

two weeks after their return from travel, a period of time judged to be early enough

to reduce recall bias further, but late enough to allow any travel-related problems

such as jet lag or minor infections to have resolved or been diagnosed.

Arrangements were made for the researcher to call again if the planned interview

was at an inconvenient moment for the participant. At the end of the interview

travellers were thanked for their participation and sent a book token in recognition

of their time.

An automatic two-way telephone conversation recorder was used (Phonapart

TL1076) with a new 90-minute tape cassette for each participant. Interview

recording was conducted within the Office of Communications (OFCOM, 2007)

guidelines, notably informing the participant on tape that the interview was being

The tapes were transcribed in an environment that ensured the participant’s

confidentiality, using the conventions and style previously described for the

transcription of the AV consultation recordings. Analysis of interview transcripts

followed the framework used in the interview schedule to identify:

1. episodes of ill health or health problems

2. how the traveller managed and dealt with that problem

3. how they knew how to manage that problem

4. whether they had specifically employed advice given to them in their

consultation

5. whether they had chosen not to act on advice received in their consultation.

Points four and five required comparative analysis between advice given by the

nurse in the AV recordings of consultations and evidence of the traveller acting in

accordance (or not) with that advice. A final element of analysis was thematic, to

search the data for evidence to support or refute themes that had emerged from

previous methods, or for any new themes. The findings are presented in Chapter

6, Phase Three: What do travellers say and do?

Documento similar