Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Health Services Research 1/2015

Open Access 01-12-2015 | Research article

Multiple sclerosis outpatient future groups: improving the quality of participant interaction and ideation tools within service improvement activities

Authors: Alison Thomson, Carol Rivas, Gavin Giovannoni

Published in: BMC Health Services Research | Issue 1/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Improving the patient experience is a key focus within the National Health Service. This has led us to consider how health services are experienced, from both staff and patient perspectives. Novel service improvement activities bring staff and patients together to use design-led methods to improve how health services are delivered. The Multiple Sclerosis Outpatient Future Group study aimed to explore how analogies and props can be used to facilitate rich interactions between staff and patients within these activities. This paper will consider how these interactions supported participants to share experiences, generate ideas and suggest service improvements.

Method

Qualitative explorative study using ‘future groups,’ a reinterpretation of the recognised focus groups method directed towards exploring future alternatives through employing analogies and physical props to engage participants to speculate about future service interactions and health experiences. Participants were people with multiple sclerosis (PwMS) and outpatient staff: staff nurses, nursing assistants, junior sisters and reception staff.

Results

Use of future groups, analogies and physical props enabled PwMS and outpatient staff to invest their own ideas and feelings in the service improvement activity and envisage alternative health care scenarios. The combination of participants in the groups with their diverse perspectives and knowledge of the service led to a collaborative approach in which staff highlighted potential practical problems and patients ensured ideas were holistic. Service improvements were prototyped and tested in the outpatient clinic.

Conclusion

Design-led methods such as future groups using analogies and physical props can be used to facilitate interactions between staff and patients in service improvement activities, leading to the generation of meaningful ideas. It is hoped that improving the quality of ideation tools within design-led methods can contribute to developing successful service interventions in service improvement activities.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Cayton H. Theory and overviews: Patients as entrepreneurs: Who is in charge of change? In: Andersson E, Tritter J, Wilson R, editors. Healthy Democracy: The Future of Involvement in Heath and Social Care. Department of Health. London: Involve and NHS National Centre for Involvement. 2006;19-26. Cayton H. Theory and overviews: Patients as entrepreneurs: Who is in charge of change? In: Andersson E, Tritter J, Wilson R, editors. Healthy Democracy: The Future of Involvement in Heath and Social Care. Department of Health. London: Involve and NHS National Centre for Involvement. 2006;19-26.
2.
go back to reference Patient and Public Empowerment: Understanding what matters: A guide to using patient feedback to transform care. Department of Health; 2009. Patient and Public Empowerment: Understanding what matters: A guide to using patient feedback to transform care. Department of Health; 2009.
3.
go back to reference Coulter A. Measures of Patients’ Experience in Hospital: Purpose, Methods and Uses. London: King’s Fund; 2009. Coulter A. Measures of Patients’ Experience in Hospital: Purpose, Methods and Uses. London: King’s Fund; 2009.
4.
go back to reference Parker S, Parker S. Demos (Organization : London E: Unlocking Innovation (pbk.): Why Citizens Hold the Key to Public Service Reform. London: Demos; 2007. Parker S, Parker S. Demos (Organization : London E: Unlocking Innovation (pbk.): Why Citizens Hold the Key to Public Service Reform. London: Demos; 2007.
5.
go back to reference Bate P, Robert G. Bringing User Experience to Healthcare Improvement: The Concepts, Methods and Practices of Experience-Based Design. Oxford. New York: Radcliffe Pub; 2007. Bate P, Robert G. Bringing User Experience to Healthcare Improvement: The Concepts, Methods and Practices of Experience-Based Design. Oxford. New York: Radcliffe Pub; 2007.
6.
go back to reference The Kings Fund. The Patient-Centred Care Project. Evaluation Report. London: The Kings Fund; 2011. The Kings Fund. The Patient-Centred Care Project. Evaluation Report. London: The Kings Fund; 2011.
7.
go back to reference Iedema R, Merrick E, Piper D, Britton K, Gray J, Verma R, et al. Codesigning as a Discursive Practice in Emergency Health Services: The Architecture of Deliberation. J Appl Behav Sci. 2010;46:73–91.CrossRef Iedema R, Merrick E, Piper D, Britton K, Gray J, Verma R, et al. Codesigning as a Discursive Practice in Emergency Health Services: The Architecture of Deliberation. J Appl Behav Sci. 2010;46:73–91.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Bowen S, McSeveny K, Lockley E, Wolstenholme D, Cobb M, Dearden A. How was it for you? Experiences of participatory design in the UK health service. CoDesign. 2013;9:230–46.CrossRef Bowen S, McSeveny K, Lockley E, Wolstenholme D, Cobb M, Dearden A. How was it for you? Experiences of participatory design in the UK health service. CoDesign. 2013;9:230–46.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Donetto S, Tsianakas V, Robert G. Using Experience-Based Co-Design (EBCD) to Improve the Quality of Healthcare: Mapping Where We Are Now and Establishing Future Directions. London: King’s College London; 2014. Donetto S, Tsianakas V, Robert G. Using Experience-Based Co-Design (EBCD) to Improve the Quality of Healthcare: Mapping Where We Are Now and Establishing Future Directions. London: King’s College London; 2014.
10.
go back to reference Freire K, Sangiorgi D. Service Design and Healthcare Innovation : From Consumption, to co-Production to co-Creation. Sweden: Linkoping; 2010. Freire K, Sangiorgi D. Service Design and Healthcare Innovation : From Consumption, to co-Production to co-Creation. Sweden: Linkoping; 2010.
12.
go back to reference Macdonald AS. The inner resource: enabling the designer within Us All – a case study. Design J. 2013;16:175–96.CrossRef Macdonald AS. The inner resource: enabling the designer within Us All – a case study. Design J. 2013;16:175–96.CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Malpass M. Between Wit and reason: defining associative, speculative, and critical design in practice. Des Cult. 2013;5:333–56. Malpass M. Between Wit and reason: defining associative, speculative, and critical design in practice. Des Cult. 2013;5:333–56.
14.
go back to reference Kitzinger J. The methodology of focus groups: the importance of interaction between research participants. Sociol Health Illness. 1994;16:103–21.CrossRef Kitzinger J. The methodology of focus groups: the importance of interaction between research participants. Sociol Health Illness. 1994;16:103–21.CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Morgan DL. Focus Group Kit 1 1. Thousand Oaks, Calif: u.a.: Sage Publ; 1998. Morgan DL. Focus Group Kit 1 1. Thousand Oaks, Calif: u.a.: Sage Publ; 1998.
16.
go back to reference Bowling A. Research Methods in Health Investigating Health and Health Services. Maidenhead, Berkshire, England. New York, NY: McGraw Hill/Open University Press; 2009. Bowling A. Research Methods in Health Investigating Health and Health Services. Maidenhead, Berkshire, England. New York, NY: McGraw Hill/Open University Press; 2009.
17.
go back to reference Bender DE, Ewbank D. The focus group as a tool for health research: issues in design and analysis. Health Trans Rev Cultural Soc Behav Determinants health. 1994;4:63–80. Bender DE, Ewbank D. The focus group as a tool for health research: issues in design and analysis. Health Trans Rev Cultural Soc Behav Determinants health. 1994;4:63–80.
19.
go back to reference Crossley ML. “Could you please pass one of those health leaflets along?”: exploring health, morality and resistance through focus groups. Soc Sci Med. 2002;55:1471–83.CrossRefPubMed Crossley ML. “Could you please pass one of those health leaflets along?”: exploring health, morality and resistance through focus groups. Soc Sci Med. 2002;55:1471–83.CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Glaser BG, Strauss AL. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. New Brunswick, N.J: Aldine Transaction; 2012. Glaser BG, Strauss AL. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. New Brunswick, N.J: Aldine Transaction; 2012.
21.
go back to reference Dewar B, Mackay R, Smith S, Pullin S, Tocher R. Use of emotional touchpoints as a method of tapping into the experience of receiving compassionate care in a hospital setting. J Res Nurs. 2009;15:29–41.CrossRef Dewar B, Mackay R, Smith S, Pullin S, Tocher R. Use of emotional touchpoints as a method of tapping into the experience of receiving compassionate care in a hospital setting. J Res Nurs. 2009;15:29–41.CrossRef
22.
go back to reference Manen M van: Phenomenology of practice. Phenomenology & Practice 2007;1 Manen M van: Phenomenology of practice. Phenomenology & Practice 2007;1
23.
go back to reference Janesick VJ. The dance of qualitative research design: Metaphor, methodolatry, and meaning. In: Denzin NK, Lincoln YS, editors. Handbook of Qualitative Research. 1st ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 1994. p. 209–19. Janesick VJ. The dance of qualitative research design: Metaphor, methodolatry, and meaning. In: Denzin NK, Lincoln YS, editors. Handbook of Qualitative Research. 1st ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 1994. p. 209–19.
24.
go back to reference Stewart DW, Shamdasani PN. Focus Groups: Theory and Practice, Applied Social Research Methods Series, v. 20. Newbury Park, Calif: Sage Publications; 1990. Stewart DW, Shamdasani PN. Focus Groups: Theory and Practice, Applied Social Research Methods Series, v. 20. Newbury Park, Calif: Sage Publications; 1990.
25.
go back to reference Moreno R, Valdez A. Cognitive load and learning effects of having students organize pictures and words in multimedia environments: The role of student interactivity and feedback. Educ Technol Res Dev. 2005;53:35–45.CrossRef Moreno R, Valdez A. Cognitive load and learning effects of having students organize pictures and words in multimedia environments: The role of student interactivity and feedback. Educ Technol Res Dev. 2005;53:35–45.CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Crosswaite C, Curtice L. Disseminating research results-the challenge of bridging the gap between health research and health action. Health Promot Int. 1994;9:289–96.CrossRef Crosswaite C, Curtice L. Disseminating research results-the challenge of bridging the gap between health research and health action. Health Promot Int. 1994;9:289–96.CrossRef
27.
go back to reference Brown D, McWilliam C, Ward-Griffin C. Client-centred empowering partnering in nursing. J Adv Nurs. 2006;53:160–8.CrossRefPubMed Brown D, McWilliam C, Ward-Griffin C. Client-centred empowering partnering in nursing. J Adv Nurs. 2006;53:160–8.CrossRefPubMed
28.
go back to reference Bowen S, Dearden A, Wright P, Wolstenholme D, Cobb M: Participatory healthcare service design and innovation. In: Bodker K, Bratteteig T, Loi D and Robertson T, editors. PDC '10 Proceedings of the 11th Biennial Participatory Design Conference. ACM International Conference Proceeding Series. New York: ACM Press; 155-158. Bowen S, Dearden A, Wright P, Wolstenholme D, Cobb M: Participatory healthcare service design and innovation. In: Bodker K, Bratteteig T, Loi D and Robertson T, editors. PDC '10 Proceedings of the 11th Biennial Participatory Design Conference. ACM International Conference Proceeding Series. New York: ACM Press; 155-158.
29.
go back to reference Gaver B, Dunne T, Pacenti E. Design: Cultural probes. Interactions. 1999;6:21–9.CrossRef Gaver B, Dunne T, Pacenti E. Design: Cultural probes. Interactions. 1999;6:21–9.CrossRef
30.
go back to reference Gaver WW, Boucher A, Pennington S, Walker B. Cultural probes and the value of uncertainty. Interactions. 2004;11:53.CrossRef Gaver WW, Boucher A, Pennington S, Walker B. Cultural probes and the value of uncertainty. Interactions. 2004;11:53.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Multiple sclerosis outpatient future groups: improving the quality of participant interaction and ideation tools within service improvement activities
Authors
Alison Thomson
Carol Rivas
Gavin Giovannoni
Publication date
01-12-2015
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Health Services Research / Issue 1/2015
Electronic ISSN: 1472-6963
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-015-0773-8

Other articles of this Issue 1/2015

BMC Health Services Research 1/2015 Go to the issue