2.5. Co‐Design Workshops

SJ Susanna Tuvemo Johnson
CY Charlotte Ytterberg
EP Elizabeth Peterson
SJ Sverker Johansson
MK Marie Kierkegaard
KG Kristina Gottberg
MF Maria Flink
ask Ask a question
Favorite

After initial planning meetings within the co‐developing phase, a structured co‐design process was initiated, based on design thinking [22], with the goal of strengthening the programme's quality and relevance to end users. The co‐design process utilized five 4‐h online workshops that occurred in December 2020. The online format was used due to the COVID‐19 pandemic. Each workshop involved the operative group and an external facilitator (innovation manager). In the first and the last workshops, respectively, the innovation manager and the operative group planned and summarized workshops two, three and four. The second and fourth workshops involved pwMS (six pwMS in each workshop), and the third workshop involved seven healthcare professionals. Twelve pwMS (10 women and two men) who could understand and communicate in Swedish, had the ability to use and access technical devices for online meetings (computer or tablet with internet access) and had experience with falls and/or near falls were recruited to the workshops. The pwMS were diverse with respect to time since diagnosis, disease severity and ambulatory capacity. The patient organization Neuro Sweden was involved in the recruitment of pwMS. Support on how to use the online meeting platform was provided by the members of the operative group to those in need of such support. The seven healthcare professionals (five women and two men) involved in the third workshop included two physiotherapists, two occupational therapists, one social worker, one registered nurse and one assistant nurse. Each had at least 9 years of experience in MS care and/or rehabilitation. The healthcare professionals were recruited through the research group's network.

The co‐design process was iterative with each workshop building upon the outcomes of the previous workshop(s). Each session began with an ice‐breaker activity and included both small‐group discussions in break‐out rooms and full‐group discussions to capture the individual statements and to take advantage of the group's dynamics. Online design tools such as storyboards and construct maps were used to get a common picture of the intervention sought and for modelling of a fall prevention intervention.

Do you have any questions about this protocol?

Post your question to gather feedback from the community. We will also invite the authors of this article to respond.

post Post a Question
0 Q&A