Table 1.
POWER key informant characteristics.
| Cape town | Johannesburg | Kisumu | All sites | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N participants interviewed | 11 | 10 | 15 | 36 |
| Age | 32 (27–43) | 40 (36–43) | 30 (29–42) | 33 (29–42) |
| Female | 7 (64%) | 8 (80%) | 9 (60%) | 24 (67%) |
| POWER-affiliateda | 10 (91%) | 6 (60%) | 10 (67%) | 26 (72%) |
| Primary occupational role b | ||||
| Healthcare provider | 8 (73%) | 6 (60%) | 10 (67%) | 24 (67%) |
| HCT counselor | 3 (37.5%) | 2 (33%) | 3 (30%) | 8 (33%) |
| Clinicianc | 3 (37.5%) | 2 (33%) | 6 (60%) | 11 (46%) |
| Other | 2 (25%) | 2 (33%) | 1 (10%) | 5 (21%) |
| Other key informant | 3 (27%) | 4 (40%) | 5 (33%) | 12 (33%) |
| Years working as healthcare provider d | 8 (5–10) | 10 (6–10) | 6 (3–8) | 6 (4–10) |
| Years working in PrEP delivery | 2 (1–2) | 3 (2–3) | 2 (1–2) | 2 (1–2) |
a
Participant was considered POWER-affiliated if s/he currently or formerly worked for the POWER study.
b
Based on participants primary role vis-à-vis PrEP and POWER. For example, a participant who is a doctor by profession but whose primary role in POWER is as a study coordinator, is counted as “other key informant.”
c
Clinicians include nurses and doctors/medical officers.
d
Excludes interviewees from the category “other key informant.”