Acceptability construct (definition) | Client | Provider | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Ref. code | Sub-theme | Ref. code | Sub-theme | |
A. Affective attitude (How an individual feel about MI) | A-FC-01 | A medium to express views freely and be listened to* | A-FP-01 | A novel behavioural therapy with a prospect of a new skills acquisition* |
A-FC-02 | Mutual understanding and support in deciding to initiate HIV treatment* | A-FP-02 | MI empowered and facilitated to explore clients’ problems* | |
A-BC-01† | Inconsistent engagement leading to discomfort† | A-BP-01 | Extra time and effort in the learning curve to effectively deliver MI† | |
A-BC-02 | Initial doubts over MI as another form of “talk therapy”† | A-BP-02 | Limited capacity of MI to engage clients with severe drug use† | |
B. Ethicality (The extent to which MI has good fit with an individual's value system) | B-FC-01 | Freedom to express emotions and articulate ideas were cathartic and encouraged truthful conversations* | B-FP-01 | Re-affirmation of a client's problems through active listening acknowledged their dignity and appreciated their participation* |
B-BP-01 | Provider-centric values with emphasis on abstinence, compliant ART, and other noble health pursuits hindered MI adaptation* | |||
C. Burden (Amount of effort that is required to participate in MI) | C-BC-01 | Unique life circumstances posed a chall- enge to participation in fixed schedules† | C-BP-01 | Other clinical and clerical duties posed a challenge to sustained MI delivery† |
C-BC-02 | Discomfort in detaching oneself from deep-seated problems for planning an effective course of action† | C-BP-02 | “Trials and errors” in reconciling MI principles with preferred counselling style† | |
D. Opportunity cost (The extent to which benefits, profits or values must be given up to engage in MI) | D-BC-01 | Disruptions in daily routines due to MI sessions being scheduled at the provider’s convenience† | D-BP-01 | Forgoing other duties to accommodate extra time for MI† |
E. Intervention coherence (The extent to which the participant understands MI and how it works) | E-FC-01 | MI exposed underlying social relations and unmet expectations that deviated clients from their care* | E-FP-01 | MI built on the client's personal achievements towards a health objective* |
E-FP-02 | MI demands careful attention to the client's needs and their acknowledgement and contributions in resolving a health problem* | |||
E-FC-02 | Solutions in MI are reflective of subjective life circumstances as opposed to be-ing prescriptive | |||
E-BC-01 | An unmet expectation of a ‘closure’ or 'milestone' after each session† | |||
F. Self-efficacy (The participant's confidence that they can perform the behavior[s] required to participate in in MI) | F-FC-01 | High confidence in adhering to MI sessions and negotiating among the daily activities to commit to change* | F-BP-01 | Generational gaps in the client-provider relationship posed a challenge† |
F-BP-02 | Confusion in determining the appropriate stage of change† | |||
F-BC-01 | Doubts if the resulting change was durable† | F-BP-03 | Compromised commitment to MI due to competing duties† | |
G. Perceived effectiveness (The extent to which MI is perceived as likely to achieve its purpose) | G-FC-01 | MI confronted long held irrational beliefs and situated the problem around the interactions with personal and professional aspects of life* | G-FP-01 | MI helps clients deal with social problems driving medication non-adherence* |
G-FP-02 | HIV treatment adherence is the first step towards improvements in quality of life* | |||
G-FC-02 | MI worked to resolve social conflicts in order to expand support resources and enable change* | G-BP-01 | Effectiveness is contingent on the severity of client’s drug use† | |
G-BC-01 | Prioritising which conflicts to resolve can be a challenge† |