Co-producing novel wound care products for Epidermolysis bullosa; an empirical case study of the use of surrogates in the design and prototype development process

International Wound Journal

Volumn 10, Issue 3, 2013, Pages 265-273

  Grocott, Patricia ^a   Blackwell, Rebecca ^a   Currie, Conchita ^b   Pillay, Elizabeth ^c   Robert, Glenn ^a  

^a KING'S COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b CLC Consultancy Limited   (United Kingdom)

^c GUY'S AND ST THOMAS' NHS FOUNDATION TRUST   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Co production; Epidermolysis bullosa; Novel wound dressing retention garment; Surrogates; User experience

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL NURSE SPECIALIST; COMFORT; EPIDERMOLYSIS BULLOSA; HUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT; TEMPERATURE; WORKSHOP; WOUND; WOUND CARE; WOUND DRESSING;

BANDAGES; EPIDERMOLYSIS BULLOSA; HUMANS; RESEARCH DESIGN; WOUND HEALING;

EID: 84878134267     PISSN: 17424801     EISSN: 1742481X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1742-481X.2012.00972.x     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Pillay E. Epidermolysis bullosa. Part 1: causes, presentation and complications. Br J Nurs 2008;17:292-6.
2. DebRA. 2011. URL http://www.debra.org.uk/genetic-research.html [accessed on 24 June 2011].
3. Posnet J, Franks P. The burden of chronic wounds in the UK. Nurs Times 2008;104:44-5.
4. Campling N, Grocott P, Cowley S. Disconnection: the user voice within the wound dressing supply chain. J Nurs Manage 2008;16:204-13.
5. Shah SG, Farrow A, Robinson I. The representation of healthcare end users' perspectives by surrogates in healthcare decisions: a literature review. Scand J Caring Sci 2009;23:809-19.
6. Browne N, Grocott P, Cowley S, Cameron J, Dealey C, Keogh A, Vowden K, Vowden P. Woundcare research for appropriate products (WRAP): validation of the TELER method involving users. Int J Nurs Stud 2004;41:559-71.
7. Grocott P, Blackwell R, Pillay E, Young R. Digital TELER: clinical note-making and patient outcome measures [serial on the Internet]. Wounds Int 2011;2. URL http://woundsinternational.com/article.php?issueid=336&contentid=122&articleid=10058&page=1 [accessed on 5 March 2012].
8. Reason P. The practice of co-operative inquiry. Syst Pract Act Res 2002;15:169-76.
9. Heron J, Reason P. A participatory inquiry paradigm. Qual Inq 1997;3:274-94.
10. Grocott P, Weir H, Bridgelal Ram M. A model of user engagement in medical device development. Int J Health Care Qual Assur 2007;20:484-93.
11. Bridgelal Ram M, Campling N, Grocott P, Weir H. A methodology for a structured survey of the healthcare literature related to medical device users. Evaluation 2008;14:49-73.
12. Cooper R, Kleinschmidt E. An investigation into the new product process: steps, deficiencies and impact. J Prod Innov Manage 1986;3:71-85.
13. Sculpher M, Drummond M, Buxton M. The iterative use of economic evaluation as part of the process of health technology assessment. J Health Serv Res Policy 1997;2:26-30.
14. Sheredos S, Cupo M. The department of veterans affairs rehabilitation research and development service's technology transfer process. Technol Disabil 1997;7:25-9.
15. Medical Research Council. A framework for development and evaluation of RCTs for complex interventions to improve health. URL http://www.mrc.ac.uk/Utilities/Documentrecord/index.htm?d=MRC003372 [accessed on 5 March 2012].
16. Medical Research Council. Developing and evaluating complex interventions: new guidance. URL http://www.mrc.ac.uk/complexinterventionsguidance [accessed on 10 October 2010].
17. Grocott P, Campling N. A methodology for evaluating wound care products in complex chronic wounds. Wounds UK 2009;5:28-34.
18. Grocott P, Cowley S, Richardson A. Solving methodological challenges using a theory-driven evaluation in the study of complex clinical care. Evaluation 2002;8:306-421.
19. Grocott P, Blackwell R, Weir H, Pilley E. Living in dressings at bandages: findings from workshops with people with epidermolysis bullosa. Int Wound J. In press.
20. Sethi P. Appropirate technolgy for rehabilitation aids in developing countries. Ann Nat Acad Med Sci (India) 1982;18:34-42.
21. Project TRJL. Jaipur limb. The rotary jaipur limb project. URL http://www.rotaryjaipurlimb.co.uk/ [accessed on 5 March 2012].
22. Money AG, Barrett J, Kuljis J, Craven MP, Martin JL, Young T. The role of the user within the medical device design and development process: medical device manufacturers' perspectives [serial on the Internet]. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak 2011;15. URL http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6947/11/15 [accessed on 5 March 2012].
23. Castle N. Are family members suitable proxies for transitional care unit residents when collecting satisfaction information? Int J Qual Health Care 2005;17:439-45.
24. Bate P, Robert G. Experience-based design: from redesigning the system around the patient to co-designing services with the patient. Qual Saf Health Care 2006;15:307-10.
25. Bate P, Robert G. Bringing user experience to healthcare improvement. Oxford: Radcliffe Publishing, 2007.