Co-design to deliver service improvement: What does this mean and how can we do it? A qualitative study with upper gastrointestinal cancer patients and professionals.
cancer
co-design
health care professionals
patients
service improvement
Journal
Cancer reports (Hoboken, N.J.)
ISSN: 2573-8348
Titre abrégé: Cancer Rep (Hoboken)
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101747728
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
03 2023
03 2023
Historique:
revised:
20
09
2022
received:
27
07
2022
accepted:
18
10
2022
pubmed:
9
11
2022
medline:
22
3
2023
entrez:
8
11
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
There is strategic objective to incorporate the principles and practice of co-design into routine service development and improvement. The aim was to explore the concept and feasibility of service co-design with patients and health professionals with regards to the upper gastrointestinal (UGI) cancer care pathway. Qualitative telephone interviews and face-to-face focus groups in one region of England. Twenty patients completed interviews. Nine patients and ten professionals formed two focus groups. Patients were referred through the urgent (two week) GP referral route and were within six months of receiving their first treatment for an UGI cancer. Professionals were working as service planners and providers of the UGI cancer care pathway. Thematic analysis was undertaken. Six themes emerged: Responsibilities and expectations, Knowledge and understanding, Valuing patient input, Building relationships, Environment for co-design activities, Impact and effectiveness. Based on the themes a checklist has been created to provide practical suggestions for both professionals and patients on approaching co-design for service improvement. This study offers policy and practice partners a clearer understanding of co-design and factors to consider when approaching co-design in real life settings.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
There is strategic objective to incorporate the principles and practice of co-design into routine service development and improvement.
AIM
The aim was to explore the concept and feasibility of service co-design with patients and health professionals with regards to the upper gastrointestinal (UGI) cancer care pathway.
METHODS AND RESULTS
Qualitative telephone interviews and face-to-face focus groups in one region of England. Twenty patients completed interviews. Nine patients and ten professionals formed two focus groups. Patients were referred through the urgent (two week) GP referral route and were within six months of receiving their first treatment for an UGI cancer. Professionals were working as service planners and providers of the UGI cancer care pathway. Thematic analysis was undertaken. Six themes emerged: Responsibilities and expectations, Knowledge and understanding, Valuing patient input, Building relationships, Environment for co-design activities, Impact and effectiveness. Based on the themes a checklist has been created to provide practical suggestions for both professionals and patients on approaching co-design for service improvement.
CONCLUSION
This study offers policy and practice partners a clearer understanding of co-design and factors to consider when approaching co-design in real life settings.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36345861
doi: 10.1002/cnr2.1748
pmc: PMC10026281
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e1748Informations de copyright
© 2022 The Authors. Cancer Reports published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.
Références
BMJ. 2015 Feb 10;350:g7714
pubmed: 25670179
BMJ Open. 2020 Jul 29;10(7):e041465
pubmed: 32727741
Support Care Cancer. 2021 Aug;29(8):4847-4858
pubmed: 33544245
BMJ Open. 2016 Jun 28;6(6):e011938
pubmed: 27354083
Health Care Manag (Frederick). 2016 Oct/Dec;35(4):284-293
pubmed: 27676370
J Health Organ Manag. 2014;28(6):714-30
pubmed: 25420353
BMJ Open. 2020 Dec 21;10(12):e041073
pubmed: 33371034
BMJ. 2002 Nov 30;325(7375):1263
pubmed: 12458240
Patient Educ Couns. 2006 Feb;60(2):201-5
pubmed: 16442461
Palliat Support Care. 2016 Jun;14(3):212-24
pubmed: 26235481
N Z Med J. 2012 Jun 29;125(1357):76-87
pubmed: 22854362
Int J Qual Health Care. 2007 Dec;19(6):349-57
pubmed: 17872937
J Med Internet Res. 2021 Jun 14;23(6):e27076
pubmed: 34125072
Cancer Rep (Hoboken). 2023 Mar;6(3):e1748
pubmed: 36345861
J Health Serv Res Policy. 2014 Oct;19(4):200-7
pubmed: 24840387
J Oncol Pract. 2016 Dec;12(12):e1035-e1041
pubmed: 27624947
BMJ Open. 2013 Jan 03;3(1):
pubmed: 23293244
Int J Older People Nurs. 2012 Jun;7(2):83-94
pubmed: 22531048
Health Expect. 2022 Jun;25(3):902-913
pubmed: 35322510
Acad Med. 2014 Sep;89(9):1245-51
pubmed: 24979285
Health Expect. 2019 Feb;22(1):93-101
pubmed: 30289592
Health Expect. 2020 Dec;23(6):1512-1522
pubmed: 32989907
Support Care Cancer. 2012 Nov;20(11):2639-47
pubmed: 22544223