Table 2 Summary of the lessons learned from the follow-up participant interviews

Context

Difficult working with youth workers who are already stretched;

Timing to start recruitment (e.g. exams for students) was difficult;

Funding cuts affected condom availability in community settings

Fidelity

Make the solo-condom testing clearer in all written and verbal communication

Reach

Targeted appropriate populations, but shy/embarrassed people may be hard to reach

BME groups hard to reach; religious views may be a barrier

Recruitment

Make contact during long gaps in between study activity; reminders were good

Adverts, cards, posters and website were well-received

Researchers’ ability to join in with youth organised activities is important

Credible source

Website/university information important, as well as researchers’ background

Researcher came across as knowledgeable about sexual health issues and approachable

Condom demonstration

Several participants who thought they were skilled at application still got things wrong and found demo useful

Important to include a ‘reminder’ and to ensure competency

Rating form and questionnaires

Some said these were too long. Would be good to have open-text questions on rating forms and have a visual tracking system to see progress on the questionnaires

Impact of study

Most had no awareness about variety of condoms and lubes available; identified condoms they liked and felt more confident with

Initial worry about additional workload (a bit of resistance); make clearer realistic expectations on workload.

Has already changed practice—services are offering a wider variety of condoms

Anything we missed? Possible improvements

Transgender and non-binary people—maybe our information does not make clear enough that HIS-UK is suitable for all.

The ‘interruption’ condoms are to sex—need ideas on how to reduce

Be opportunistic—interview immediately rather than appointments if possible