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

BMC Health Services Research

Volumn 15, Issue 1, 2015, Pages

  Thomson, Alison ^a   Rivas, Carol ^a,b   Giovannoni, Gavin ^a  

^a QUEEN MARY UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHAMPTON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Design; Focus group; Multiple sclerosis; Outpatients; Patient experience; Props; Quality

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; COOPERATION; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE DELIVERY; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; MALE; MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS; NATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE; ORGANIZATION; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; OUTPATIENT; PATIENT EDUCATION; PATIENT PARTICIPATION; PSYCHOLOGY; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; SOCIAL SUPPORT; TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT;

ADULT; ATTITUDE TO HEALTH; COOPERATIVE BEHAVIOR; DELIVERY OF HEALTH CARE; FEMALE; FOCUS GROUPS; HUMANS; MALE; MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS; ORGANIZATIONAL OBJECTIVES; OUTPATIENTS; PATIENT EDUCATION AS TOPIC; PATIENT PARTICIPATION; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; QUALITY IMPROVEMENT; SOCIAL SUPPORT; STATE MEDICINE;

EID: 84928338928     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14726963     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/s12913-015-0773-8     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. 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. Patient and Public Empowerment: Understanding what matters: A guide to using patient feedback to transform care. Department of Health; 2009.
3. Coulter A. Measures of Patients' Experience in Hospital: Purpose, Methods and Uses. London: King's Fund; 2009.
4. Parker S, Parker S. Demos (Organization: London E: Unlocking Innovation (pbk.): Why Citizens Hold the Key to Public Service Reform. London: Demos; 2007.
5. 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. The Kings Fund. The Patient-Centred Care Project. Evaluation Report. London: The Kings Fund; 2011.
7. 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.
8. 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.
9. 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. Freire K, Sangiorgi D. Service Design and Healthcare Innovation: From Consumption, to co-Production to co-Creation. Sweden: Linkoping; 2010.
11. Kimbell L: Mapping Social Design Practice: Beyond the Toolkit. Mapping Social Design Research and Practice 2013. [ http://mappingsocialdesign.org/2013/11/19/mapping-social-design-practice-beyond-the-toolkit/] Accessed: 01/12/2013
12. Macdonald AS. The inner resource: enabling the designer within Us All - a case study. Design J. 2013;16:175-96.
13. Malpass M. Between Wit and reason: defining associative, speculative, and critical design in practice. Des Cult. 2013;5:333-56.
14. Kitzinger J. The methodology of focus groups: the importance of interaction between research participants. Sociol Health Illness. 1994;16:103-21.
15. Morgan DL. Focus Group Kit 1 1. Thousand Oaks, Calif: u.a.: Sage Publ; 1998.
16. Bowling A. Research Methods in Health Investigating Health and Health Services. Maidenhead, Berkshire, England. New York, NY: McGraw Hill/Open University Press; 2009.
17. 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.
18. Kitzinger J. Qualitative research. Introducing focus groups. BMJ. 1995;311:299-302.
19. 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.
20. Glaser BG, Strauss AL. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. New Brunswick, N.J: Aldine Transaction; 2012.
21. 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.
22. Manen M van: Phenomenology of practice. Phenomenology & Practice 2007;1
23. 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. Stewart DW, Shamdasani PN. Focus Groups: Theory and Practice, Applied Social Research Methods Series, v. 20. Newbury Park, Calif: Sage Publications; 1990.
25. 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.
26. 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.
27. Brown D, McWilliam C, Ward-Griffin C. Client-centred empowering partnering in nursing. J Adv Nurs. 2006;53:160-8.
28. 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. Gaver B, Dunne T, Pacenti E. Design: Cultural probes. Interactions. 1999;6:21-9.
30. Gaver WW, Boucher A, Pennington S, Walker B. Cultural probes and the value of uncertainty. Interactions. 2004;11:53.