Background ACP with a facilitator is acceptable with HIV+ adolescents, but the influence of facilitator on participant satisfaction with FACE has not been studied.
Aim Examine the relationship between quality of facilitator’s communication and participant satisfaction ratings.
Methods A total of 48 dyads (HIV+ adolescents and their families), randomly assigned into the FACE intervention in a two-arm RCT, were used for this analysis. Participants completed two questionnaires after each of the three FACE sessions: 13-item Satisfaction Questionnaire (Lyon); 5-item Quality of Participant-Interviewer Communication Scale (QC, Curtis). Higher mean scores indicate higher session satisfaction.
Results Teens were 54% male; 91% African-American; mean age 18 years (range 14–21). Examined by session, correlation between satisfaction and QC scores varied: for adolescents, correlations were: Session 1 (r = 0.40, p = 0.0050); Session 2 (r = 0.27, p = 0.0659); Session 3 (r = 0.40, p = 0.0050). The corresponding figures for families were: Session 1 (0.39, p = 0.0062); Session 2 (r = 0.34, p = 0.0190); Session 3 (r = 0.48, p = 0.0007). Examined by session, means of seven satisfaction items (range 1–35): for teens, Session 1 (27.1); Session 2 (29.1); Session 3 (29.4). The corresponding figures for families were: Session 1 (29.4); Session 2 (30.8); Session 3 (31.2).
Discussion Adolescents and families agreed that participating in the FACE intervention was satisfactory. The ratings of study satisfaction were significantly correlated with the QC among both adolescents and families, with the exception of session 2 with the adolescents.
Conclusion Assessing satisfaction with a family-centred intervention should include quality of participant-facilitator communication, as this may be an important variable predicting satisfaction, independent of intervention effects.