Individual user involvement at Healthy Life Centres: a qualitative study exploring the perspective of health professionals

Figures & data

Table I. Main topics in the interview guide.

(1) What do you understand by user involvement at the HLC?

(2) What kind of experiences do you have with involving the users?

- examples of positive and/or negative? - examples of challenges (if so, how)? - can user involvement be in conflict with your professional judgement (if so, how)?

()(3) What kind of meaning or significance do you think user involvement has?

- benefit or effect? - influence on the service or on the way you work? - can user involvement have an intrinsic value (if so, how)? - can user involvement be health promoting (if so, how)?

()(4) What is needed of you to facilitate for user involvement?

- to what extent do the users want to be involved (why or why not)? - what are the prerequisites for user involvement?

Table II. Example of stepwise analysis using STC.

Step 1: Preliminary theme	Step 2: Identifying and sorting meaning units	Step 3: Condensation	Step 4: Final themes
Professionalism	“When I think about user involvement during the process, then I feel it is present all the time, because we try to be where the user are and adjust to the user in front of us.” “I experience that the clear majority understand that you cannot adjust everything to all participants. You have a sort of minimum common plan, and that is what they have decided to join.” “The goal is, as I see it, to tailor a plan for every single user.”	You have to keep yourself updated and as professionals we know what is effective training and healthy diet, and we have a responsibility to offer a service that is evidence-based. So, you have to balance between what the users want and our professional knowledge, if this is in conflict. I think, however, user involvement is present, because our goal is to tailor and individualize the service to every user’s needs.	Assessing and adjusting to the user’s needs and life situation.

Table III. Demographic characteristics of the participants (N = 23).

Characteristics	Number of informants
Gender
Male	1
Female	22
Age
18–29	6
30–39	5
40–49	7
50–59	3
> 60	2
Profession
Physiotherapist	11
Nurse	6
Educationalist	2
Clinical dietitian	2
Occupational therapist	1
Bachelor’s degree public health	1
Years of Seniority at the HLC
< 2	7
2–4	7
> 5	6
Percentage of full-time equivalent
20–30	6
40–50	7
60–70	1
90–100	9

Table IV. Characteristics of the HLCs (N = 23).

Characteristics	Number of HLCs
Established
2003 or before	2
2004–2006	3
2007–2009	3
2010–2012	9
2013–2014	6
Number of positions
1	9
2	6
3	5
4	1
9	1
10	1
Number of inhabitants served
1350–4999	7
5000–9999	7
10,000–19,999	4
20,000–49,999	3
50,000–200,000	2