The in-depth interview process

The main source of data for this study was interviews held with the key informants. By key informants, I mean people who are knowledgeable about particular issues that are the subject of the research study. These are people whose insights were useful for me as a researcher to understand a particular situation. The key informants for this study were drawn from healthcare providers and patients. The healthcare providers were made up of doctors, nurses, counsellors and pharmacists. Although the intention was to interview the administrators at some of the healthcare facilities, this was not possible as they were always busy.

The interviewer conducted the interview for approximately 20-30 minutes using an interview schedule, based on a semi-structured questionnaire. Participants were approached, I introduced myself to the potential participants and gave a brief description of the study and requested the participants to participate in the study. After consent was given, a further detailed description of the study was given and participants were then asked questions. The

semi-structured interview guide or questionnaire for patients and healthcare providers differed.

Interviews were held in English or IsiXhosa. All interviews held with healthcare providers in Grahamstown were in English, and all interviews with healthcare providers in Cofimvaba were done in IsiXhosa. The decision of the language of the interview was based on the choice of the informant. The choice for healthcare providers in Grahamstown to conduct the interviews in English is attributed to the fact that they themselves as healthcare providers speak English to one another. Interviews conducted with patients in Grahamstown were conducted in English and IsiXhosa. All interviews conducted with patients in Cofimvaba were in IsiXhosa. I would ask them which language they prefer the interview be conducted in and whatever language they preferred was the language used. None of the informants requested any other language outside of the languages mentioned.

Patients were asked what their experiences were in relation to communicating with their healthcare providers and which language they used when communicating with their healthcare providers. They were also asked what happens in instances where the patient and the healthcare provider do not speak the same language and whether healthcare providers use interpreters in those instances.

Parents were also asked what language problems they had encountered which they felt prevented them from getting good medical care. They were asked whether they had had problems with communication with their doctor or other healthcare provider.

The following format was employed in interviews: I would ask the patients a question, and when the answer was “no”, I would stop and proceed to the next question and when the answer was yes, I would ask the participant to expand. Here is an example below.

Researcher: Have you ever experienced any difficulties in communicating with your

healthcare provider?

Participant: No.

Researcher: stop and move onto next question. or

Researcher: Have you ever experienced any difficulties in communicating with your

healthcare provider?

Participant: Yes.

Researcher: How happened? What did you say to the healthcare provider? Explain more

please?

Healthcare providers were asked whether language had any bearing on their ability as a healthcare provider in delivering healthcare services. They were also asked what languages they could speak for general and medical communication and what resources were available to them to respond to possible language barriers which could arise.

In the event that language barriers were raised, the nature of the problems, possible effects of these on them and possible solutions which were sought to address these obstacles were asked.

The same interview format was employed for interviews with healthcare providers and patients. The above questions are only some of the questions asked during the language interviews. A complete schedule is provided in annexure B.

After the interviews were held I assessed aspects of the interviews, the adequacy of the research tool and the adequacy of the outputs. After the first set of interviews in Cofimvaba, the data was transcribed and translated and analyzed. I found that there were no problems with the organizational aspects or performance of the interviews. The same process was applied to the second set of interviews in Grahamstown.

During the data collection process, various meetings were held with academic supervisors at the Rhodes University Department of African Languages and Institute of Social and Economic Research. The data which was being collected was reviewed for analysis purposes. It was advised that given the number of interviews done, I should listen to all recordings, make notes and transcribe those chosen for analysis purposes. Thus, out of the total number of 40 interviews done, only 19 were chosen and transcribed for final analysis. These were chosen based on their ability to address the research questions and their difference in content for purposes of drawing out various themes and findings. The remaining interviews were not discarded, these were used to support or contrast the content of the main chosen interviews.

With regard to the transcription and translation process, the selected interviews were transcribed. After the transcription, those which needed translation from IsiXhosa into English were then translated. Selected quotes for the data analysis were therefore highlighted and organized into themes for data analysis.

All interviews (individual and focus group interviews) conducted in both research areas, Cofimvaba and Grahamstown were semi-structured and recorded. All interviews were listened to and those chosen for analysis and quotations were transcribed.

Interviews with healthcare providers took place in their consultancy rooms in the respective healthcare facilities. The rooms were comfortable and contained with a table, two chairs with some files and paperwork on the tables. The walls had some pictures. There was also a bed and some other medical equipment. The interviews were recorded with the consent of the participants using a digital tape recorder.

The digital tape recorder was placed in the middle of the table to enable the study participants to talk in their normal voices. The interviewer avoided interrupting the respondent or talking at the same time as them. It was not deemed necessary to ask any respondent to talk more clearly, slowly or louder to enable adequate audio recording as all interviews were audible.

3.4.3 Collection o f background and Context and Review of Documents

According to Marshall (2006:107), for every qualitative study, data on the background and context of the subject/topic or area is gathered. This may not be a major part of data collection but at least, in proposing a particular setting, the researcher gathers demographic data and describes geographic and historical particulars. When he/she reviews old property transactions, skims recent newspaper editorials, or obtains information from a Web site, he/she is collecting data. Whether or not he/she counts this as data collection, he/she must proceed with caution (ibid).

This method was applied through gathering geographic and demographic data of the research sites and its inhabitants. This was done through reviewing government reports, statistical reports and other relevant information for the purposes of this study. This data was gathered to provide contextual background to the research sites.