"A coalition of the willing": experiences of co-designing an online pain management programme (iSelf-help) for people with persistent pain.
Chronic pain
Co-design
Participatory action
Patient engagement
Qualitative
Journal
Research involvement and engagement
ISSN: 2056-7529
Titre abrégé: Res Involv Engagem
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101708164
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
11 May 2021
11 May 2021
Historique:
received:
24
12
2020
accepted:
20
04
2021
entrez:
12
5
2021
pubmed:
13
5
2021
medline:
13
5
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Participatory approaches to developing health interventions with end-users are recommended to improve uptake and use. We aimed to explore the experiences of co-designing an online-delivered pain management programme (iSelf-help) for people with persistent pain. A modified participatory action research (PAR) framework was used to co-design contents and delivery of iSelf-help. The PAR team included: (1) a patient advisory group consisting of people living with persistent pain (n = 8), (2) pain management service clinicians (n = 2), (3) health researchers (n = 3), (4) digital health experts (n = 2), (5) a health literacy expert, and (6) two Māori health researchers and our community partner who led the cultural appropriateness of iSelf-help for Māori (the Indigenous population of New Zealand). The iSelf-help co-design processes and activities of the 'PAR' team is reported in another paper. In this paper, all PAR team members were invited to share their experiences of the co-design process. Individual interviews were held with 12 PAR team members. Interview transcripts were analysed using the General Inductive Approach. Five common themes were identified from the interviews: (1) Shared understanding and values of the co-design process, (2) Mismatched expectations with content creation, (3) Flexibility to share power and decision making, (4) Common thread of knowledge, and (5) Shared determination. Sustaining these themes was an overarching theme of "A coalition of the willing". PAR team members valued the shared determination and responsibility to co-design iSelf-help. They also acknowledged the complexities and challenges during the process related to mismatched expectations, power sharing and establishing a common thread of knowledge. Successful co-design requires a shared commitment and responsibility as a coalition to meet the aspirations of end-users, within the boundaries of time and budget. Persistent non-cancer pain affects one in five people globally. Māori (the Indigenous population of New Zealand) experience a higher persistent pain prevalence than non-Māori. People living with persistent pain in New Zealand experience significant challenges in accessing specialised pain services, such as long-waiting times for referral, delays in getting a persistent pain diagnosis, lack of specialised health professionals in pain management and services that do not provide culturally responsive care. In an increasingly digital world, one way of addressing such access barriers is to provide pain services remotely. Using a participatory action research (PAR) framework, we co-designed an online version of an existing hospital-based pain management programme. The PAR ‘team’ included patients living with persistent pain, who have previously completed the pain management programme and other stakeholders including pain management clinicians, health researchers, technology design experts, and a health literacy expert. The PAR ‘team’ also included two Māori researchers, and our Māori community partner who led the cultural adaptation process of the online programme with Māori community members living with persistent pain. We invited all the PAR team members asking their experiences of co-designing an online pain management programme (iSelf-help) that is culturally adapted for Māori. Our results from interviewing 12 PAR team members suggest the shared values and determination to co-design the online programme enabled team members’ journey as a coalition to be successful, however, along the way, the process was complex and challenging at times both within and between the various teams. The key factors that caused such complexity were the mismatched expectations and understandings of the project, negotiating power sharing between the various teams and establishing a common thread of knowledge. We conclude that successful co-design requires a shared commitment and responsibility as a coalition to meet the aspirations of end-users, within the limits of time and budget.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Participatory approaches to developing health interventions with end-users are recommended to improve uptake and use. We aimed to explore the experiences of co-designing an online-delivered pain management programme (iSelf-help) for people with persistent pain.
METHODS
METHODS
A modified participatory action research (PAR) framework was used to co-design contents and delivery of iSelf-help. The PAR team included: (1) a patient advisory group consisting of people living with persistent pain (n = 8), (2) pain management service clinicians (n = 2), (3) health researchers (n = 3), (4) digital health experts (n = 2), (5) a health literacy expert, and (6) two Māori health researchers and our community partner who led the cultural appropriateness of iSelf-help for Māori (the Indigenous population of New Zealand). The iSelf-help co-design processes and activities of the 'PAR' team is reported in another paper. In this paper, all PAR team members were invited to share their experiences of the co-design process. Individual interviews were held with 12 PAR team members. Interview transcripts were analysed using the General Inductive Approach.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Five common themes were identified from the interviews: (1) Shared understanding and values of the co-design process, (2) Mismatched expectations with content creation, (3) Flexibility to share power and decision making, (4) Common thread of knowledge, and (5) Shared determination. Sustaining these themes was an overarching theme of "A coalition of the willing".
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
PAR team members valued the shared determination and responsibility to co-design iSelf-help. They also acknowledged the complexities and challenges during the process related to mismatched expectations, power sharing and establishing a common thread of knowledge. Successful co-design requires a shared commitment and responsibility as a coalition to meet the aspirations of end-users, within the boundaries of time and budget.
Persistent non-cancer pain affects one in five people globally. Māori (the Indigenous population of New Zealand) experience a higher persistent pain prevalence than non-Māori. People living with persistent pain in New Zealand experience significant challenges in accessing specialised pain services, such as long-waiting times for referral, delays in getting a persistent pain diagnosis, lack of specialised health professionals in pain management and services that do not provide culturally responsive care. In an increasingly digital world, one way of addressing such access barriers is to provide pain services remotely. Using a participatory action research (PAR) framework, we co-designed an online version of an existing hospital-based pain management programme. The PAR ‘team’ included patients living with persistent pain, who have previously completed the pain management programme and other stakeholders including pain management clinicians, health researchers, technology design experts, and a health literacy expert. The PAR ‘team’ also included two Māori researchers, and our Māori community partner who led the cultural adaptation process of the online programme with Māori community members living with persistent pain. We invited all the PAR team members asking their experiences of co-designing an online pain management programme (iSelf-help) that is culturally adapted for Māori. Our results from interviewing 12 PAR team members suggest the shared values and determination to co-design the online programme enabled team members’ journey as a coalition to be successful, however, along the way, the process was complex and challenging at times both within and between the various teams. The key factors that caused such complexity were the mismatched expectations and understandings of the project, negotiating power sharing between the various teams and establishing a common thread of knowledge. We conclude that successful co-design requires a shared commitment and responsibility as a coalition to meet the aspirations of end-users, within the limits of time and budget.
Autres résumés
Type: plain-language-summary
(eng)
Persistent non-cancer pain affects one in five people globally. Māori (the Indigenous population of New Zealand) experience a higher persistent pain prevalence than non-Māori. People living with persistent pain in New Zealand experience significant challenges in accessing specialised pain services, such as long-waiting times for referral, delays in getting a persistent pain diagnosis, lack of specialised health professionals in pain management and services that do not provide culturally responsive care. In an increasingly digital world, one way of addressing such access barriers is to provide pain services remotely. Using a participatory action research (PAR) framework, we co-designed an online version of an existing hospital-based pain management programme. The PAR ‘team’ included patients living with persistent pain, who have previously completed the pain management programme and other stakeholders including pain management clinicians, health researchers, technology design experts, and a health literacy expert. The PAR ‘team’ also included two Māori researchers, and our Māori community partner who led the cultural adaptation process of the online programme with Māori community members living with persistent pain. We invited all the PAR team members asking their experiences of co-designing an online pain management programme (iSelf-help) that is culturally adapted for Māori. Our results from interviewing 12 PAR team members suggest the shared values and determination to co-design the online programme enabled team members’ journey as a coalition to be successful, however, along the way, the process was complex and challenging at times both within and between the various teams. The key factors that caused such complexity were the mismatched expectations and understandings of the project, negotiating power sharing between the various teams and establishing a common thread of knowledge. We conclude that successful co-design requires a shared commitment and responsibility as a coalition to meet the aspirations of end-users, within the limits of time and budget.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33975653
doi: 10.1186/s40900-021-00275-0
pii: 10.1186/s40900-021-00275-0
pmc: PMC8112221
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
28Subventions
Organisme : Health Research Council of New Zealand
ID : 18/254
Références
Health Aff (Millwood). 2016 Apr;35(4):583-9
pubmed: 27044955
Health Expect. 2019 Aug;22(4):785-801
pubmed: 31012259
Disabil Rehabil. 2015;37(15):1390-400
pubmed: 25243763
Res Involv Engagem. 2017 Aug 2;3:13
pubmed: 29062538
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2013 Jan;94(1 Suppl):S30-42
pubmed: 23260776
Phys Ther. 2018 May 1;98(5):381-397
pubmed: 29669089
BMC Med Ethics. 2018 Mar 7;19(1):21
pubmed: 29514618
Res Involv Engagem. 2018 May 22;4:17
pubmed: 29796308
Pain. 2018 Sep;159 Suppl 1:S56-S64
pubmed: 30113948
Health Res Policy Syst. 2020 Feb 11;18(1):17
pubmed: 32046728
BMJ Open. 2021 Feb 4;11(2):e046376
pubmed: 33542046
N Z Med J. 2018 Mar 23;131(1472):21-28
pubmed: 29565933
Res Involv Engagem. 2020 Jul 2;6:38
pubmed: 32637153
BMC Health Serv Res. 2014 Feb 26;14:89
pubmed: 24568690
Int J Equity Health. 2019 Oct 28;18(1):163
pubmed: 31660988
Health Aff (Millwood). 2013 Feb;32(2):223-31
pubmed: 23381514
Scand J Public Health. 2020 Aug;48(6):617-628
pubmed: 31319762
J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2020 Aug;50(8):413-414
pubmed: 32736501
Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol. 2016 Jun;30(3):483-502
pubmed: 27886943
Int J Qual Health Care. 2007 Dec;19(6):349-57
pubmed: 17872937
CMAJ. 2019 Aug 6;191(31):E860-E864
pubmed: 31387956
Health Policy. 2002 Aug;61(2):213-36
pubmed: 12088893
Implement Sci. 2018 Jul 26;13(1):98
pubmed: 30045735