Abstract
Abstract
Background
Asthma home-visit programs delivered by community health workers (CHWs) are an effective way to improve asthma outcomes and cost of care, through performing home environmental inspections, delivering education and hands-on demonstrations, and providing personalized behavior change support. During the COVID-19 pandemic, many in-person asthma CHW programs have been adapted to be delivered virtually, but it is unclear whether this is acceptable or feasible for clients with asthma. This qualitative study sought to identify perspectives of prior clients of the Public Health–Seattle & King County Asthma Program on acceptability and feasibility of a hypothetical virtual asthma program.
Methods
We performed semi-structured interviews with participants speaking English, Spanish, and Somali. An a priori codebook was developed based on the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability and was revised iteratively during coding. Intra-rater reliability was established, and thematic analysis was used to determine major themes.
Results
A total of 19 individuals participated (9 speaking English, 8 Spanish, and 2 Somali). Krippendorf’s alpha was 0.848, indicating high intra-rater reliability. Our results demonstrated that many participants felt positively about the prospect of completing the program virtually, but they also expected a variety of challenges, the most important of which were lack of engagement with the CHW and lack of confidence in the accuracy of a virtual home inspection. Participants also varied widely in their comfort level with videoconferencing platforms and their access to adequate internet connectivity.
Conclusions
Acceptability and feasibility of virtual programming varies widely between participants, indicating that there may be no “one-size-fits-all” approach. We present several recommendations for adapting in-person asthma home visit programs to a virtual format, including considering a hybrid approach to delivery, making concerted efforts to build rapport when using videoconferencing, and deliberately evaluating the effectiveness of new adaptations, especially if a virtual environmental assessment is attempted.
Funder
Seattle Children’s Research Institute - Center for Clinical and Translational Research
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
Reference29 articles.
1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Most Recent State or Territory Asthma Data [Internet]. 2023 [cited 2023 Aug 10]. Available from: https://www.cdc.gov/asthma/most_recent_data_states.htm.
2. Washington State Department of Health. Asthma Washington State 2014. 2014 [cited 2019 Jul 23]; Available from: https://www.doh.wa.gov/Portals/1/Documents/Pubs/345-304-AsthmaInWashingtonState.pdf.
3. Gold DR, Adamkiewicz G, Arshad SH, Celedón JC, Chapman M, Chew GL, et al. NIAID, NIEHS, NHLBI, MCAN Workshop Report: the indoor environment and Childhood Asthma: implications for Home Environmental intervention in Asthma Prevention and Management. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2017;140(4):933–49.
4. Gruchalla RS, Pongracic J, Plaut M, Evans R, Visness CM, Walter M, et al. Inner City Asthma Study: relationships among sensitivity, allergen exposure, and Asthma morbidity. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2005;115(3):478–85.
5. Grant T, Croce E, Matsui EC. Asthma and the social determinants of health. Annals of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology [Internet]. 2022;128(1):5–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anai.2021.10.002.