Although this study utilized elements of mixed methods, the current manuscript reports exclusively on the qualitative dimensions of healthcare students’ and interprofessional faculty’s experiences at a CHF, focusing on thematic insights derived from conversational interviews. Our goal when using a mixed methods approach, survey methodology, and conversational interviews was to integrate the breath of quantitative data with the depth and context of qualitative data. In this study, the providers and students working at the CHF were able to provide rich data. This combination allows the investigation of multiple dimensions of a phenomenon that might be missed by using only one method. Recognizing that CHFs offer a dynamic, real-world learning environment where participants engage in diverse health education activities and interact with various community members, we employed a qualitative approach to delve deeper into their perceptions and interpretations of these experiences. Specifically, we chose conversational interviewing as our primary qualitative approach to collect the data due to its alignment with the unique context of CHFs. These events are often characterized by a fast-paced atmosphere with multiple providers and activities coinciding. As Leverentz [16] described, conversational interviewing offers a flexible and adaptable approach that allows researchers in CHFs to integrate into this bustling environment seamlessly. These interviews’ short, informal nature allows for authentic and spontaneous responses from participants, capturing the nuances and complexities of their experiences in real time. According to Swain and King [17], informal conversations in qualitative research foster a relaxed environment, promote greater ease of communication, and produce rich, more realistic data. One of the issues with conversational interviewing is the short time frame available for in-depth discussions. However, despite its brevity, this method has proven effective in hectic environments where quick, yet meaningful interactions are necessary. It allows for the collection of valuable insights without disrupting the fast-paced nature of the setting, making it a practical approach in time-constrained situations.
This methodology aligns with Knowles’ Adult Learning Theory [10], which emphasizes understanding learners’ lived experiences and perspectives. By engaging in conversational interviews within the context of the CHF, we sought to gain insights into how students and faculty make meaning of their participation in this unique learning environment, how they perceive the benefits and challenges of interprofessional collaboration, and how their experiences at the CHF may influence their future practice. This study was approved by the University’s Institutional Review Board (IRB 276141). The study was considered exempt by IRB and was conducted in accordance with the institutional ethical standards consistent with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration.
Study setting
CHFs are typically held in diverse locations, such as churches, schools, or community centers, and offer a range of health services to the public [18]. The CHF in this study, held annually since 2007 at a local church, is organized by a health ministry team comprised of interprofessional healthcare providers. The fair provides free services, including physical exams, dental care information, mental health assessments, and screenings, to approximately 400 individuals annually, predominantly from Black/African American and Hispanic communities. Volunteers from various clinical settings and a local university representing diverse healthcare disciplines assist in providing these services. This interprofessional collaboration aligns with the growing recognition of the importance of teamwork in healthcare, emphasizing the benefits of shared decision-making and coordinated care [19, 20]. The CHF serves as a real-world learning laboratory for students and professionals, mirroring the collaborative nature of modern healthcare practice.
Participant selection
We used purposive sampling to recruit diverse participants who were actively involved in the annual CHF. The sample size of 14 participants, representing both students and faculty from various healthcare disciplines, participated, ensuring that diverse perspectives across healthcare disciplines were captured. While small, this sample allowed for an in-depth exploration of experiences specific to the unique CHF setting. Prior to starting the conversational interview participants were provided with information about the study and we requested verbal consent form prior to starting the interview. All participants were18 years of age or older. The student participants represented diverse healthcare professions, including nursing, dentistry, pharmacy, and public health. The faculty participants also represented a range of disciplines, ensuring diverse perspectives on the CHF’s educational and service delivery aspects.
Before engaging in conversational interviews, all participants completed a demographic data sheet to gather information. The data demographic sheet for faculty members consisted of eight items: age, gender, race, ethnicity, specialty, years of experience as a provider, years of teaching, and previous history of participating in health fairs. The student demographic data sheet consisted of seven items: age, gender, race, ethnicity, highest degree completed, specialty, and previous history of participation in health fairs.
Data collection
Consistent with the conversational interviewing approach, a concise list of open-ended questions was developed to elicit participants’ perspectives on the learning opportunities, challenges, and overall experiences at the CHF [21]. These questions, refined through collaborative discussions and voting during a research team meeting, aimed to explore:
-
Students’ and faculty’s experiences applying their knowledge and skills at the fair.
-
Participants’ perceptions of the fair’s effectiveness in facilitating clinical skill development.
-
Identification of logistical or educational barriers and facilitators encountered by participants during their experience at the CHF.
-
Suggestions for improvement to enhance the learning value of future health fair experiences for both students and faculty.
All interviews were conducted in a quiet area within the CHF by a single researcher who was experienced in qualitative interviewing. Despite the flexibility of conversational interviewing, the brief and informal nature of the interactions may have limited the depth of data collection. To mitigate this, the researcher employed probing techniques and follow-up questions to capture meaningful insights within the time constraints imposed by the fast-paced CHF environment. Interviews were digitally recorded on an encrypted iPad for accuracy and uploaded to a secure university server accessible only to the research team. All recordings were professionally transcribed verbatim, checked for accuracy, and interviews were de-identified. The average interview duration was 8 min, reflecting the dynamic and fast-paced nature of the CHF environment.
Data analysis
We employed Clarke and Braun’s six-step thematic analysis [22] to identify patterns and themes within the interview data. Two research team members independently coded the first three interview transcripts using MAXQDA software [23] facilitating the organization and comparison of codes. Once initial codes were established, a coding framework was collaboratively developed within MAXQDA and applied to categorize the entire dataset systematically. The coding team convened weekly to discuss emerging codes, identify patterns, and refine themes through an iterative process, utilizing MAXQDA’s features to visualize connections and relationships between codes. Any disagreements were resolved through consensus. A third team member of the research team performed confirmation coding analysis.
Trustworthiness and rigor
We employed several rigorous qualitative research strategies to ensure the trustworthiness of the findings. The research team maintained a detailed audit trail throughout the research process and data analysis process to document decision-making. Furthermore, the research team had regular meetings to maintain the integrity of the data. Lastly, during data analysis, a third member of the research team, who has extensive experience in organizing and working at health fairs settings helped confirm the themes. All coding disagreements were resolved by consensus.
link