Qualitative interviews are generally conducted in person. As the coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19) prevents in-person interviews, methodological studies which investigate the use of the telephone for persons with different illness experiences are needed. The aim was to explore experiences of the use of telephone during semi-structured research interviews, from the perspective of participants and researchers. Data were collected from mobile phone interviews with 32 individuals who had common mental disorders or multimorbidity which were analyzed thematically, as well as field notes reflecting researchers’ experiences. The findings reveal several advantages of conducting interviews using mobile phones: flexibility, balanced anonymity and power relations, as well as a positive effect on self-disclosure and emotional display (leading to less emotional work and social responsibility). Challenges included the loss of human encounter, intense listening, and worries about technology, as well as sounds or disturbances in the environment. However, the positive aspects of not seeing each other were regarded as more important. In addition, we present some strategies before, during, and after conducting telephone interviews. Telephone interviews can be a valuable first option for data collection, allowing more individuals to be given a fair opportunity to share their experiences.
Background In 2016, the Karolinska University Hospital introduced a one-year-project with a mobile team of five asylum social workers (ASW), specializing in migration. This study evaluates the ordinary hospital social workers (HSW) experiences of introducing ASWs for asylum seeking patients. Methods Descriptive analysis was made of answers from a questionnaire sent to all 144 HSW at the hospital (57% response rate). Qualitative content analysis was made of written comments. Results Of the HSWs, 51% always and 29% sometimes contacted an ASW in relation to asylum seeking patients. Of those who contacted an ASW, 74% stated that the ASWs increased the efficiency of care of asylum seeking patients. 65% agreed that ASWs had an improving effect on the quality of encounters between staff and asylum seekers. Also, 67% agreed that the ASWs off-loading function improved the HSWs working conditions. Even though the ASWs were working at two hospitals located in different parts of the region, 78% of HSWs found them to be available. The main reason to not always contact an ASW was that it was not necessary in the specific case (55%). A majority (66%) reported increased knowledge about asylum processes as an outcome of introducing the ASWs at the hospital. This was also highlighted in the written comments, where ASWs detailed and updated knowledge as well as established contacts with e.g. the Swedish Migration Board was emphasized. ASWs specialist competence enabled patients to quickly receive legally correct and accurate information, which decreased worries among patients as well as staff members. Conclusions The HSWs described the ASWs as being important to patients as well as to staff. The ASWs improved the quality of encounters between staff and asylum seekers and strengthened the patient’s right to health and social care. The HSWs also reported an off-loading function, improving the working conditions and the over-all efficiency of care. Key messages The HSWs found that the ASWs increased the efficiency of care and quality of encounters between staff and asylum seekers. ASWs detailed knowledge and established external contacts enabled patient to receive accurate information quickly, which decreased worries among both patients and staff members.
Background: Although communication is strongly emphasized in palliative care, not much research has focused on communication between patients and their loved ones. The purpose was to increase understanding of communication around severe illness between patients with a life-threatening disease, receiving palliative care, and their loved ones. Secondary intention was to identify strategies making easier for patients to talk about their condition with loved ones. The article is based on in-depth interviews with 15 patients and 8 loved ones. Interviews were analysed using qualitative content analysis. Communication about patient’s illness was often described as balancing between wanting to inform or know and wanting to protect. Both patients and loved ones deliberately talk in a way that reflects their relationship. They act, negotiate and communicate aiming at not wanting to create situations that are perceived as uncomfortable, either for themselves or for others. Patients also take everyday practicalities into account. In these interactions, some people become the patients’ inner circle – people with whom information is shared and co-owned. Other people find themselves outside the circle and patients may use them as test-subjects – speaking to them about things they might not dare reveal to their inner circle. These considerations are reflected in the themes: What is communicated, How communication is performed, and When it takes place. Our findings show that acting on the ideals of an “open and honest” form of communication is not always to be recommended. Professionals must instead strive to understand and respect the intentions of those involved.
In 2016–2017, a large Swedish hospital introduced a mobile team of asylum social workers to work with asylum-seeking and undocumented patients. Based on interviews with the asylum social workers and the theoretical concepts of jurisdiction and professional discretion, this study explores how they experienced their work and developed their specialist competence and strategies for health social work with migrants. The findings show that they not only relieved staff and supported patients and relatives but also systemised the knowledge about health social work with migrants and created a professional specialty with a socially, rather than medically, defined group of patients.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.