102 Chapter 4 well as facilitators that underlie patient engagement. We distinguished three different compliance groups in our sample: (1) patients who completed the intervention as intended, meaning they were matched to a coach for at least 10 months (i.e., full compliance), (2) patients who discontinued prematurely (i.e., low compliance), (3) and patients who failed to start with the intervention (i.e., no compliance). In total, 28 patients and 17 coaches were approached, of which 22 patients and 14 coaches agreed to participate in the interviews. Two patients could not be reached, and four patientswithdrew fromthe RCT. One coach could not be reached, one refused participation, and one could not be included because the patient withdrew consent. Three coaches were interviewed twice as they were matched again after completion of their first coaching trajectory. Furthermore, one patient was matched twice, therefore both coaches were interviewed. The convenience sample consisted of patients (and coaches) in different compliance groups (no compliance: n = 6, low compliance: n = 7, full compliance: n = 9); demographic characteristics are shown in Table 1. Therefore, we were able to obtain data from a heterogeneous sample that provided sufficient data richness. Data collection One-to-one semi-structured interview guides for patients and coaches were used to encourage participants to share personal experiences freely, and to cover a set of topics in each interview. The interview guides (available from the first author) were developed during a pilot and refined during data collection. The interview guides comprised initial broader, open-ended questions related to patient engagement, for example: how come you did not start with a coach in the end?, and experiences for example: how did you experience the contact with the coach/patient?, with subsequent more focused follow-up questions, for example: how did the appointments with the coach/patient proceed? Prompts and short periods of silence were used to encourage participants to continue talking and to provide more details. Patients and coaches were interviewed separately. Before the start of the interview, participants were verbally informed about the expected duration, procedure, and confidentiality of the interview, and had the opportunity to ask questions. Interviews were conducted verbally either face-to-face or by telephone by the first author (LS) or a research assistant in a range of locations (e.g., home, clinic, work), depending on the preferences of participants. The researchers conducting the interviews had a master’s degree in clinical psychology, which included training in interviewing skills, and had received additional
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjY0ODMw