Background: Many intervention development projects fail to bridge the gap from basic research to clinical practice. Instead of theory-based approaches to intervention development, co-design prioritizes the end users' perspective as well as continuous collaboration between stakeholders, designers, and researchers throughout the project. This alternative approach to the development of interventions is expected to promote the adaptation to existing treatment activities and to be responsive to the requirements of end users. Objective: The first objective was to provide an overview of all activities that were employed during the course of a research project to develop a relapse prevention intervention for interdisciplinary pain treatment programs. The second objective was to examine how co-design may contribute to stakeholder involvement, generation of relevant insights and ideas, and incorporation of stakeholder input into the intervention design. Methods: We performed an embedded single case study and used the double diamond model to describe the process of intervention development. Using all available data sources, we also performed deductive content analysis to reflect on this process. Results: By critically reviewing the value and function of a co-design project with respect to idea generation, stakeholder involvement, and incorporation of stakeholder input into the intervention design, we demonstrated how co-design shaped the transition from ideas, via concepts, to a prototype for a relapse prevention intervention. Conclusions: Structural use of co-design throughout the project resulted in many different participating stakeholders and stimulating design activities. As a consequence, the majority of the components of the final prototype can be traced back to the information that stakeholders provided during the project. Although this illustrates how co-design facilitates the integration of contextual information into the intervention design, further experimental testing is required to evaluate to what extent this approach ultimately leads to improved usability as well as patient outcomes in the context of clinical practice.
Background: Many intervention development projects fail to bridge the gap from basic research to clinical practice. Instead of theory-based approaches to intervention development, co-design prioritizes the end users’ perspective as well as continuous collaboration between stakeholders, designers, and researchers throughout the project. This alternative approach to the development of interventions is expected to promote the adaptation to existing treatment activities and to be responsive to the requirements of end users. Objective: The first objective was to provide an overview of all activities that were employed during the course of a research project to develop a relapse prevention intervention for interdisciplinary pain treatment programs. The second objective was to examine how co-design may contribute to stakeholder involvement, generation of relevant insights and ideas, and incorporation of stakeholder input into the intervention design. Methods: We performed an embedded single case study and used the double diamond model to describe the process of intervention development. Using all available data sources, we also performed deductive content analysis to reflect on this process. Results: By critically reviewing the value and function of a co-design project with respect to idea generation, stakeholder involvement, and incorporation of stakeholder input into the intervention design, we demonstrated how co-design shaped the transition from ideas, via concepts, to a prototype for a relapse prevention intervention. Conclusions: Structural use of co-design throughout the project resulted in many different participating stakeholders and stimulating design activities. As a consequence, the majority of the components of the final prototype can be traced back to the information that stakeholders provided during the project. Although this illustrates how co-design facilitates the integration of contextual information into the intervention design, further experimental testing is required to evaluate to what extent this approach ultimately leads to improved usability as well as patient outcomes in the context of clinical practice.
LINK
De zorg voor psychisch ontregelde patiënten die somatische spoedzorg nodig hebben is in de praktijk vaak suboptimaal, omdat de primaire focus van die spoedzorg vooral op somatische klachten ligt. Hierdoor krijgt deze kwetsbare groep patiënten niet altijd de zorg die zij nodig hebben, waardoor behandeling van psychische klachten onnodig wordt uitgesteld en de kans op escalaties toeneemt.Doel Binnen dit project wordt onderzocht wat er nodig is om de spoedzorg voor psychisch ontregelde patiënten beter te laten aansluiten op de behoeften en ervaringen van de patiënt, hun naasten en de zorgprofessionals. Resultaten Inzicht in de ervaringen en behoeften van psychisch ontregelde patiënten, hun naasten en zorgprofessionals met betrekking tot de inhoud en organisatie van de spoedzorg tijdens het traject naar (ambulancevervoer) en het verblijf op de spoedeisende hulp. Op basis van deze inzichten wordt samen met patiënten, hun naasten en zorgprofessionals een toolbox ontwikkeld met de ingrediënten die ervoor zorgen dat de spoedzorg beter aansluit bij de specifieke behoeften van deze patiënten (en hun naasten). Looptijd 01 december 2021 - 31 december 2023 Aanpak De onderzoeksmethoden binnen dit project zijn gebaseerd op de Experience-Based Co-Design (EBCD) aanpak, waarbij door middel van kwalitatieve onderzoeksmethoden inzicht wordt verkregen in de context en het perspectief van zowel patiënten als zorgprofessionals. Op basis daarvan worden, in co-creatie met patiënten en zorgprofessionals praktische oplossingen ontwikkeld. Financiering Dit project wordt gefinancierd met een SIA RAAK Publiek-subsidie, registratienummer 08.029.
