IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0303075.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A qualitative analysis of post-hoc interviews with multilevel participants of a randomized controlled trial of a community-based intervention

Author

Listed:
  • Nathan Kohrman
  • Mohamad Rashid
  • Roxana Flores
  • Ciantel Blyler
  • Noel C Barragan
  • Tony Kuo
  • Moira Inkelas
  • Steven Chen
  • Florian Rader
  • Susan Cheng
  • Christine Albert
  • Natalie A Bello
  • Joseph Ebinger

Abstract

Introduction: Community-based health interventions often demonstrate efficacy in clinical trial settings but fail to be implemented in the real-world. We sought to identify the key operational and contextual elements of the Los Angeles Barbershop Blood Pressure Study (LABBPS), an objectively successful community-based health intervention primed for real-world implementation. LABBPS was a cluster randomized control trial that paired the barbers of Black-owned barbershops with clinical pharmacists to manage uncontrolled hypertension in Black male patrons, demonstrating a substantial 21.6 mmHg reduction in systolic blood pressure. Despite this success, the LABBPS intervention has not expanded beyond the original clinical trial setting. The aim of this study was to determine the facilitating and limiting factors to expansion of the LABBPS intervention. Methods: We undertook a qualitative assessment of semi-structured interviews with study participants performed after trial completion. Interviews included a total of 31 participants including 20 (6%) of the 319 LABBPS program participants (“patrons”), 10 (19%) barbers, and one (50%) clinical pharmacist. The semi-structured interviews were focused on perceptions of the medical system, study intervention, and influence of social factors on health. Results: Several common themes emerged from thematic analysis of interview responses including: importance of care provided in a convenient and safe environment, individual responsibility for health and health-related behaviors, and engagement of trusted community members. In particular, patrons reported that receiving the intervention from their barber in a familiar environment positively influenced the formation of relationships with clinical pharmacists around shared efforts to improve medication adherence and healthy habits. All interviewee groups identified the trust diad, comprising the familiar environment and respected community member, as instrumental in increasing health-related behaviors to a degree not usually achieved by traditional healthcare providers. Discussion: In conclusion, participants of an objectively successful community-based intervention trial consistently identified key features that could facilitate wider implementation and efficacy: social trust relationships, soliciting insights of trust bearers, and consistent engagement in a familiar community setting. These findings can help to inform the design and operations of future community-based studies and programs aiming to achieve a broad and sustainable impact.

Suggested Citation

  • Nathan Kohrman & Mohamad Rashid & Roxana Flores & Ciantel Blyler & Noel C Barragan & Tony Kuo & Moira Inkelas & Steven Chen & Florian Rader & Susan Cheng & Christine Albert & Natalie A Bello & Joseph , 2024. "A qualitative analysis of post-hoc interviews with multilevel participants of a randomized controlled trial of a community-based intervention," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(5), pages 1-12, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0303075
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0303075
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0303075
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0303075&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0303075?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0303075. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.