Co-creation and co-production in health service delivery: what is it and what impact can it have?

EBN engages through a range of online social media activities to debate issues important to nurses and nursing. EBN Opinion papers highlight and expand on these debates

Innovating access to the nurse-led hepatitis C clinic using co-production

Background Many reasons for missed appointments are given by people who inject drugs and it is suggested that one solution cannot solve this complex issue (Poll et al., 2017). Increasingly, nurses and other health professionals are expected to actively involve patients and service users in developing innovative, effective and accessible services. This project used co-production as the approach to address this challenge. Aims This paper describes how a co-production method was used to develop accessible nurse-led hepatitis C virus services for people who inject drugs. Methods Using research evidence from a study conducted by the lead author as a starting point, a series of co-production workshops were run using creative co-design methods to identify the barriers to engagement with clinics. Potential solutions were then co-produced. Results The solutions included myth-busting posters, peer-support, a mobile clinic van and the offer of incentives and enablers (travel costs or a reward for attendance). Conclusions The service-development project illustrates how, with the right methods, it is possible to successfully engage with hard-to-access groups to co-produce innovative solutions for an important clinical challenge

How was it for you? Experiences of participatory design in the UK health service

Improving co-design methods implies that we need to understand those methods, paying attention to not only the effect of method choices on design outcomes, but also how methods affect the people involved in co-design. In this article, we explore participants' experiences from a year-long participatory health service design project to develop ‘Better Outpatient Services for Older People’. The project followed a defined method called experience-based design (EBD), which represented the state of the art in participatory service design within the UK National Health Service. A sample of participants in the project took part in semi-structured interviews reflecting on their involvement in and their feelings about the project. Our findings suggest that the EBD method that we employed was successful in establishing positive working relationships among the different groups of stakeholders (staff, patients, carers, advocates and design researchers), although conflicts remained throughout the project. Participants' experiences highlighted issues of wider relevance in such participatory design: cost versus benefit, sense of project momentum, locus of control, and assumptions about how change takes place in a complex environment. We propose tactics for dealing with these issues that inform the future development of techniques in user-centred healthcare design

Characterization of the Ca2+-gated and voltage-dependent k+-channel slo-1 of nematodes and its interaction with emodepside

The cyclooctadepsipeptide emodepside and its parent compound PF1022A are broad-spectrum nematicidal drugs which are able to eliminate nematodes resistant to other anthelmintics. The mode of action of cyclooctadepsipeptides is only partially understood, but involves the latrophilin Lat-1 receptor and the voltage- and calcium-activated potassium channel Slo-1. Genetic evidence suggests that emodepside exerts its anthelmintic activity predominantly through Slo-1. Indeed, slo-1 deficient Caenorhabditis elegans strains are completely emodepside resistant. However, direct effects of emodepside on Slo-1 have not been reported and these channels have only been characterized for C. elegans and related Strongylida. Molecular and bioinformatic analyses identified full-length Slo-1 cDNAs of Ascaris suum, Parascaris equorum, Toxocara canis, Dirofilaria immitis, Brugia malayi, Onchocerca gutturosa and Strongyloides ratti. Two paralogs were identified in the trichocephalids Trichuris muris, Trichuris suis and Trichinella spiralis. Several splice variants encoding truncated channels were identified in Trichuris spp. Slo-1 channels of trichocephalids form a monophyletic group, showing that duplication occurred after the divergence of Enoplea and Chromadorea. To explore the function of a representative protein, C. elegans Slo-1a was expressed in Xenopus laevis oocytes and studied in electrophysiological (voltage-clamp) experiments. Incubation of oocytes with 1-10 µM emodepside caused significantly increased currents over a wide range of step potentials in the absence of experimentally increased intracellular Ca2+, suggesting that emodepside directly opens C. elegans Slo-1a. Emodepside wash-out did not reverse the effect and the Slo-1 inhibitor verruculogen was only effective when applied before, but not after, emodepside. The identification of several splice variants and paralogs in some parasitic nematodes suggests that there are substantial differences in channel properties among species. Most importantly, this study showed for the first time that emodepside directly opens a Slo-1 channel, significantly improving the understanding of the mode of action of this drug class

Improving self-efficacy in spinal cord injury patients through "design thinking" rehabilitation workshops

Advances in surgical and medical management have significantly reduced the length of time that patients with spinal cord injury (SCI) have to stay in hospital, but has left patients with potentially less time to adjust psychologically. Following a pilot in 2012, this project was designed to test the effect of "design thinking" workshops on the self-efficacy of people undergoing rehabilitation following spinal injuries. Design thinking is about understanding the approaches and methods that designers use and then applying these to think creatively about problems and suggest ways to solve them. In this instance, design thinking is not about designing new products (although the approaches can be used to do this) but about developing a long term creative and explorative mind-set through skills such as lateral thinking, prototyping and verbal and visual communication. The principals of "design thinking" have underpinned design education and practice for many years, it is also recognised in business and innovation for example, but a literature review indicated that there was no evidence of it being used in rehabilitation or spinal injury settings. Twenty participants took part in the study; 13 (65%) were male and the average age was 37 years (range 16 to 72). Statistically significant improvements were sen in the EQ-5D score (t = -3.13, p = 0.007) and the Patient Activation Measure score (t = -3.85, p = 0.001). Other outcome measures improved but not statistically. There were no statistical effects on length of stay or readmissions rates, but qualitative interviews indicated improved patient experience.</p

Author Correction:C16orf72/HAPSTR1/TAPR1 functions with BRCA1/Senataxin to modulate replication-associated R-loops and confer resistance to PARP disruption

Correction to: Nature Communications https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-023-40779-9, published online 17 August 2023

Leading co-production in five UK collaborative research partnerships (2008–2018): responses to four tensions from senior leaders using auto-ethnography

Background: Despite growing enthusiasm for co-production in healthcare services and research, research on co-production practices is lacking. Multiple frameworks, guidelines and principles are available but little empirical research is conducted on ‘how to do’ co-production of research to improve healthcare services. This paper brings together insights from UK-based collaborative research partnerships on leading co-production. Its aim is to inform practical guidance for new partnerships planning to facilitate the co-production of applied health research in the future. Methods: Using an auto-ethnographic approach, experiential evidence was elicited through collective sense making from recorded conversations between the research team and senior leaders of five UK-based collaborative research partnerships. This approach applies a cultural analysis and interpretation of the leaders’ behaviours, thoughts and experiences of co-production taking place in 2008–2018 and involving academics, health practitioners, policy makers and representatives of third sector organisations. Results: The findings highlight a variety of practices across CLAHRCs, whereby the intersection between the senior leaders’ vision and local organisational context in which co-production occurs largely determines the nature of co-production process and outcomes. We identified four tensions in doing co-production: (1) idealistic, tokenistic vs realistic narratives, (2) power differences and (lack of) reciprocity, (3) excluding vs including language and communication, (4) individual motivation vs structural issues. Conclusions: The tensions were productive in helping collaborative research partnerships to tailor co-production practices to their local needs and opportunities. Resulting variation in co-production practices across partnerships can therefore be seen as highly advantageous creative adaptation, which makes us question the utility of seeking a unified ‘gold standard’ of co-production. Strategic leadership is an important starting point for finding context-tailored solutions; however, development of more distributed forms of leadership over time is needed to facilitate co-production practices between partners. Facilitating structures for co-production can enable power sharing and boost capacity and capability building, resulting in more inclusive language and communication and, ultimately, more credible practices of co-production in research. We provide recommendations for creating more realistic narratives around co-production and facilitating power sharing between partners

Leading co-production in five UK collaborative research partnerships (2008-2018): responses to four tensions from senior leaders using auto-ethnography

BackgroundDespite growing enthusiasm for co-production in healthcare services and research, research on co-production practices is lacking. Multiple frameworks, guidelines and principles are available but little empirical research is conducted on ‘how to do’ co-production of research to improve healthcare services. This paper brings together insights from UK-based collaborative research partnerships on leading co-production. Its aim is to inform practical guidance for new partnerships planning to facilitate the co-production of applied health research in the future. MethodsUsing an auto-ethnographic approach, experiential evidence was elicited through collective sense making from recorded conversations between the research team and senior leaders of five UK-based collaborative research partnerships. This approach applies a cultural analysis and interpretation of the leaders’ behaviours, thoughts, and experiences of co-production taking place in 2008-2018 and involving academics, health practitioners, policy makers, and representatives of third sector organisations. ResultsThe findings highlight a variety of practices across CLAHRCs, whereby the intersection between the senior leaders’ vision and local organisational context in which co-production occurs largely determines the nature of co-production process and outcomes. We identified four tensions in doing co-production: 1) idealistic, tokenistic vs realistic narratives, 2) power differences and (lack of) reciprocity, 3) excluding vs including language and communication, 4) individual motivation vs structural issues.ConclusionsThe tensions were productive in helping collaborative research partnerships to tailor co-production practices to their local needs and opportunities. Resulting variation in co-production practices across partnerships can therefore be seen as highly advantageous creative adaptation, which makes us question the utility of seeking a unified ‘gold standard’ of co-production. Strategic leadership is an important starting point for finding context-tailored solutions; however, development of more distributed forms of leadership over time is needed to facilitate co-production practices between partners. Facilitating structures for co-production can enable power sharing and boost capacity and capability building, resulting in more inclusive language and communication and, ultimately, more credible practices of co-production in research. We provide recommendations for creating more realistic narratives around co-production and facilitating power sharing between partners

Patient experience and reflective learning (PEARL): a mixed methods protocol for staff insight development in acute and intensive care medicine in the UK

INTRODUCTION: Patient and staff experiences are strongly influenced by attitudes and behaviours, and provide important insights into care quality. Patient and staff feedback could be used more effectively to enhance behaviours and improve care through systematic integration with techniques for reflective learning. We aim to develop a reflective learning framework and toolkit for healthcare staff to improve patient, family and staff experience. METHODS & ANALYSIS: Local project teams including staff and patients from the acute medical units (AMUs) and intensive care units (ICUs) of three National Health Service trusts will implement two experience surveys derived from existing instruments: a continuous patient and relative survey and an annual staff survey. Survey data will be supplemented by ethnographic interviews and observations in the workplace to evaluate barriers to and facilitators of reflective learning. Using facilitated iterative co-design, local project teams will supplement survey data with their experiences of healthcare to identify events, actions, activities and interventions which promote personal insight and empathy through reflective learning. Outputs will be collated by the central project team to develop a reflective learning framework and toolkit which will be fed back to the local groups for review, refinement and piloting. The development process will be mapped to a conceptual theory of reflective learning which combines psychological and pedagogical theories of learning, alongside theories of behaviour change based on capability, opportunity and motivation influencing behaviour. The output will be a locally-adaptable workplace-based toolkit providing guidance on using reflective learning to incorporate patient and staff experience in routine clinical activities. ETHICS & DISSEMINATION: The PEARL project has received ethics approval from the London Brent Research Ethics Committee (REC Ref 16/LO/224). We propose a national cluster randomised step-wedge trial of the toolkit developed for large-scale evaluation of impact on patient outcomes

Using creative co-design to develop a decision support tool for people with malignant pleural effusion

Abstract: Background: Malignant pleural effusion (MPE) is a common, serious problem predominantly seen in metastatic lung and breast cancer and malignant pleural mesothelioma. Recurrence of malignant pleural effusion is common, and symptoms significantly impair people’s daily lives. Numerous treatment options exist, yet choosing the most suitable depends on many factors and making decisions can be challenging in pressured, time-sensitive clinical environments. Clinicians identified a need to develop a decision support tool. This paper reports the process of co-producing an initial prototype tool. Methods: Creative co-design methods were used. Three pleural teams from three disparate clinical sites in the UK were involved. To overcome the geographical distance between sites and the ill-health of service users, novel distributed methods of creative co-design were used. Local workshops were designed and structured, including video clips of activities. These were run on each site with clinicians, patients and carers. A joint national workshop was then conducted with representatives from all stakeholder groups to consider the findings and outputs from local meetings. The design team worked with participants to develop outputs, including patient timelines and personas. These were used as the basis to develop and test prototype ideas. Results: Key messages from the workshops informed prototype development. These messages were as follows. Understanding and managing the pleural effusion was the priority for patients, not their overall cancer journey. Preferred methods for receiving information were varied but visual and graphic approaches were favoured. The main influences on people’s decisions about their MPE treatment were personal aspects of their lives, for example, how active they are, what support they have at home. The findings informed the development of a first prototype/service visualisation (a video representing a web-based support tool) to help people identify personal priorities and to guide shared treatment decisions. Conclusion: The creative design methods and distributed model used in this project overcame many of the barriers to traditional co-production methods such as power, language and time. They allowed specialist pleural teams and service users to work together to create a patient-facing decision support tool owned by those who will use it and ready for implementation and evaluation