A qualitative process evaluation of a nasal spray intervention to prevent respiratory tract infections.
Nasal sprays could be used to prevent and manage respiratory tract infections (RTIs). As part of a randomized controlled trial (ISRCTN17936080), participants received one of two nasal sprays (gel-based vs. saline) and a digital intervention. The digital intervention used behaviour change theories to...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
2025-01-01
|
| Series: | PLoS ONE |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0321314 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1850194935341383680 |
|---|---|
| author | Amelia Dennis Judith Joseph Kate Greenwell Sascha Miller Jane Vennik Laura Dennison Sian Holt Katherine Bradbury Adam W A Geraghty Paul Little Lucy Yardley |
| author_facet | Amelia Dennis Judith Joseph Kate Greenwell Sascha Miller Jane Vennik Laura Dennison Sian Holt Katherine Bradbury Adam W A Geraghty Paul Little Lucy Yardley |
| author_sort | Amelia Dennis |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Nasal sprays could be used to prevent and manage respiratory tract infections (RTIs). As part of a randomized controlled trial (ISRCTN17936080), participants received one of two nasal sprays (gel-based vs. saline) and a digital intervention. The digital intervention used behaviour change theories to encourage nasal spray use to reduce the severity and occurrences of RTIs. We explored participants' experiences of the digital intervention and nasal spray. We interviewed 31 participants (aged 19-80), sampled from the two nasal spray intervention trial arms across 3 winter seasons (including at the height of COVID-19). We analysed the interviews using thematic analysis and found two themes regarding facilitators and barriers to nasal spray use. The facilitators of nasal spray use revolved around belief in nasal spray efficacy for infection, belief the nasal spray is safe, motivation to avoid infection, sense of control over infection, and how the nasal spray is integrated into lifestyle. Barriers to nasal spray use included the belief the nasal spray is ineffective, belief the nasal spray is unnecessary, and usage difficulties. Overall, the results highlight the role of beliefs, lifestyle integration, and usage difficulties in nasal spray adherence, with implications for future digital interventions, such as addressing concerns about the nasal spray being perceived as medication. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-64d055e3af664e0cbcb67fa36c23be77 |
| institution | OA Journals |
| issn | 1932-6203 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-01-01 |
| publisher | Public Library of Science (PLoS) |
| record_format | Article |
| series | PLoS ONE |
| spelling | doaj-art-64d055e3af664e0cbcb67fa36c23be772025-08-20T02:13:53ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032025-01-01204e032131410.1371/journal.pone.0321314A qualitative process evaluation of a nasal spray intervention to prevent respiratory tract infections.Amelia DennisJudith JosephKate GreenwellSascha MillerJane VennikLaura DennisonSian HoltKatherine BradburyAdam W A GeraghtyPaul LittleLucy YardleyNasal sprays could be used to prevent and manage respiratory tract infections (RTIs). As part of a randomized controlled trial (ISRCTN17936080), participants received one of two nasal sprays (gel-based vs. saline) and a digital intervention. The digital intervention used behaviour change theories to encourage nasal spray use to reduce the severity and occurrences of RTIs. We explored participants' experiences of the digital intervention and nasal spray. We interviewed 31 participants (aged 19-80), sampled from the two nasal spray intervention trial arms across 3 winter seasons (including at the height of COVID-19). We analysed the interviews using thematic analysis and found two themes regarding facilitators and barriers to nasal spray use. The facilitators of nasal spray use revolved around belief in nasal spray efficacy for infection, belief the nasal spray is safe, motivation to avoid infection, sense of control over infection, and how the nasal spray is integrated into lifestyle. Barriers to nasal spray use included the belief the nasal spray is ineffective, belief the nasal spray is unnecessary, and usage difficulties. Overall, the results highlight the role of beliefs, lifestyle integration, and usage difficulties in nasal spray adherence, with implications for future digital interventions, such as addressing concerns about the nasal spray being perceived as medication.https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0321314 |
| spellingShingle | Amelia Dennis Judith Joseph Kate Greenwell Sascha Miller Jane Vennik Laura Dennison Sian Holt Katherine Bradbury Adam W A Geraghty Paul Little Lucy Yardley A qualitative process evaluation of a nasal spray intervention to prevent respiratory tract infections. PLoS ONE |
| title | A qualitative process evaluation of a nasal spray intervention to prevent respiratory tract infections. |
| title_full | A qualitative process evaluation of a nasal spray intervention to prevent respiratory tract infections. |
| title_fullStr | A qualitative process evaluation of a nasal spray intervention to prevent respiratory tract infections. |
| title_full_unstemmed | A qualitative process evaluation of a nasal spray intervention to prevent respiratory tract infections. |
| title_short | A qualitative process evaluation of a nasal spray intervention to prevent respiratory tract infections. |
| title_sort | qualitative process evaluation of a nasal spray intervention to prevent respiratory tract infections |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0321314 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT ameliadennis aqualitativeprocessevaluationofanasalsprayinterventiontopreventrespiratorytractinfections AT judithjoseph aqualitativeprocessevaluationofanasalsprayinterventiontopreventrespiratorytractinfections AT kategreenwell aqualitativeprocessevaluationofanasalsprayinterventiontopreventrespiratorytractinfections AT saschamiller aqualitativeprocessevaluationofanasalsprayinterventiontopreventrespiratorytractinfections AT janevennik aqualitativeprocessevaluationofanasalsprayinterventiontopreventrespiratorytractinfections AT lauradennison aqualitativeprocessevaluationofanasalsprayinterventiontopreventrespiratorytractinfections AT sianholt aqualitativeprocessevaluationofanasalsprayinterventiontopreventrespiratorytractinfections AT katherinebradbury aqualitativeprocessevaluationofanasalsprayinterventiontopreventrespiratorytractinfections AT adamwageraghty aqualitativeprocessevaluationofanasalsprayinterventiontopreventrespiratorytractinfections AT paullittle aqualitativeprocessevaluationofanasalsprayinterventiontopreventrespiratorytractinfections AT lucyyardley aqualitativeprocessevaluationofanasalsprayinterventiontopreventrespiratorytractinfections AT ameliadennis qualitativeprocessevaluationofanasalsprayinterventiontopreventrespiratorytractinfections AT judithjoseph qualitativeprocessevaluationofanasalsprayinterventiontopreventrespiratorytractinfections AT kategreenwell qualitativeprocessevaluationofanasalsprayinterventiontopreventrespiratorytractinfections AT saschamiller qualitativeprocessevaluationofanasalsprayinterventiontopreventrespiratorytractinfections AT janevennik qualitativeprocessevaluationofanasalsprayinterventiontopreventrespiratorytractinfections AT lauradennison qualitativeprocessevaluationofanasalsprayinterventiontopreventrespiratorytractinfections AT sianholt qualitativeprocessevaluationofanasalsprayinterventiontopreventrespiratorytractinfections AT katherinebradbury qualitativeprocessevaluationofanasalsprayinterventiontopreventrespiratorytractinfections AT adamwageraghty qualitativeprocessevaluationofanasalsprayinterventiontopreventrespiratorytractinfections AT paullittle qualitativeprocessevaluationofanasalsprayinterventiontopreventrespiratorytractinfections AT lucyyardley qualitativeprocessevaluationofanasalsprayinterventiontopreventrespiratorytractinfections |