Co-production in practice: How people with assisted living needs can help design and evolve technologies and services

Implementation Science

Volumn 10, Issue 1, 2015, Pages

  Wherton, Joseph ^a   Sugarhood, Paul ^b   Procter, Rob ^c   Hinder, Sue ^a   Greenhalgh, Trisha ^d  

^a QUEEN MARY UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b EAST LONDON NHS FOUNDATION TRUST   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF WARWICK   (United Kingdom)

^d UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Assistive technology; Co design; Co production; Ethnography; Telecare; Telehealth

Indexed keywords

AGED; AWARENESS; COOPERATION; CULTURAL ANTHROPOLOGY; DEVICES; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; FEMALE; HOME CARE; HUMAN; INDEPENDENT LIVING; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; SOCIAL SUPPORT; TELEMEDICINE; VERY ELDERLY;

AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ANTHROPOLOGY, CULTURAL; AWARENESS; COMMUNICATION; COOPERATIVE BEHAVIOR; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; FEMALE; HOME CARE SERVICES; HUMANS; INDEPENDENT LIVING; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; SOCIAL SUPPORT; TELEMEDICINE;

EID: 84930170696     PISSN: None     EISSN: 17485908     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/s13012-015-0271-8     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. Cartwright M, Hirani SP, Rixon L, Beynon M, Doll H, Bower P, et al. Effect of telehealth on quality of life and psychological outcomes over 12 months (Whole systems demonstrator telehealth questionnaire study); nested study of patient reported outcomes in a pragmatic, cluster randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 2013;346:f653.
2. Henderson C, Knapp M, Fernandex JL, Beecham J, Shashivadan P, Cartwright M, et al. Cost effectiveness of telehealth for patients with long term conditions (whole system demonstrator telehealth questionnaire study); nested economic evaluation in a pragmatic, cluster randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 2013;346:f1035.
3. Hendy J, Chrysanthaki T, Barlow J, Knapp M, Rogers A, Sanders C, et al. An organisational analysis of the implementation of telecare and telehealth: The whole systems demonstrator. BMC Health Serv Res. 2012;12:403-24.
4. Eccles A. The complexities of technology-based care. Telecare as perceived by care practitioners. Issues in Social Science. 2013. doi:10.5296/iss.v1i1.4464.
5. Henderson C, Knapp M, Fernandeze J, Beecham J, Hirani S, Beynon M, et al. Cost-effectiveness of telecare for people with social care needs: the Whole Systems Demonstrator cluster randomised trial. Age and Ageing. 2014. doi:10.1093/ageing/afu067.
6. Department of Health. Research and development work relating to assistive technology 2012-2013. London UK: Department of Health; 2013.
7. Greenhalgh T, Procter R, Wherton J, Sugarhood P, Shaw S. The organising vision for telehealth and telecare: discourse analysis. BMJ Open. 2012;2, e001574.
8. Gaver W, Dunne A, Pacenti E. Design: cultural probes. Interact: New Visions Hum Comput Interact. 1999;6:21-9.
9. Wherton J, Sugarhood P, Procter R, Rouncefield M, Dewsbury G, Hinder S, et al. Designing assisted living technologies 'in the wild': preliminary experiences with cultural probe methodology. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2012;12:188.
10. Greenhalgh T, Wherton J, Sugarhood P, Hinder S, Procter R, Stones R. What matters to older people with assisted living needs? A phenomenological analysis of the use and non-use of telehealth and telecare. Soc Sci Med. 2013;93:86-94.
11. Procter R, Greenhalgh T, Wherton J, Sugarhood P, Rouncefield M, Hinder S. The day-to-day co-production of ageing in place. CSCW. 2014;23:245-67.
12. ATHENE project website, www.atheneproject.org
13. Clemensen J, Larsen SB, Kyng M, Kirkevold M. Participatory design in health sciences: using cooperative experimental methods in developing health services and computer technology. Qual Health Res. 2007;17:122-30.
14. Robert GB. Participatory action research - using experience-based co-design to improve the quality of healthcare services. In: Ziebland S, Coulter A, Calabrese JD, Locock L, editors. Understanding and Using Health Experiences - improving patient care. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2013.
15. Bate P, Robert G. Bringing user experience to healthcare improvement: the concepts, methods and practices of experience-based design. Oxford: Radcliffe Publishing; 2007.
16. Hartswood M, Procter R, Rouncefield M, Slack R, Voss A. Co-realisation: evolving IT artefacts by design. In: Ackerman M, Erickson T, Halverson C, Kellogg W, editors. Resources, Co-Evolution and Artefacts. Berlin: Springer; 2008.
17. Muller MJ, Druin A. Participatory design: the third space in HCI. In: Jacko J, Sears A, editors. Handbook of HCI. Mathway, NJ: Eribaum; 2010. p. 1051-68.
18. Bodker S, Iversen OS. Staging a professional participatory design practice: moving PD beyond the initial fascination of user involvement. In: Proceedings of NordiCHI. 2002; New York:ACM:11-18
19. Barrett J, Kirk S. Running focus groups with elderly and disabled elderly participants. Appl Ergon. 2000;31:621-9.
20. Lindsay S, Jackson D, Schofield G, Olivier P. Engaging older people using participatory design. In Proceedings of CHI. 2012, New York: ACM
21. Lines L, Hone KS. Eliciting user requirements with older adults - lessons from the design of an interactive domestic alarm. Univ Access Inf Soc. 2004;3:141-8.
22. Rice M, Carmichael A. Factors facilitating or impeding older adults' creative contributions in the collaborative design of a novel DTV-based application. Univ Access Inf Soc. 2011. doi:10.1007/s10209-011-0262-8.
23. Beck E, Obrist M, Bernhaupt R, Tscheligi M. Instant card technique: how and why to apply in user-centered design. In: Proceedings of PDC'08. New York: Association for Computing Machinery; 2008. p. 162-5.
24. Muller MJ, Kuhn S. Participatory design. Communications of the ACM 1993, 36:24-
25. Picking R, Robinet A, Grout V, McGinn J, Roy A, Ellis S, et al. Case study using a methodological approach to developing user interfaces for elderly and disabled people. Comput J. 2010;53:842-59.
26. Suri JF, Marsh M. Scenario building as an ergonomics method in consumer product design. Appl Ergon. 2000;31:151-7.
27. Muller MJ. Layered participatory analysis: new developments in the CARD technique. In: Proceedings of CHI. 2001. New York: ACM:90-97
28. Newell AF, Carmichael A, Morgan M, Dickinson A. The use of theatre in requirements gathering and usability studies. Interact Comput. 2006;18:996-1011.
29. Strauss AL, Corbin J. Basics in qualitative research. London: Sage; 1990.
30. Dourish P, Bellotti V. Awareness and coordination in shared workspaces. In: Proceedings of CSCW. 1992. New York: ACM:107-114
31. Spence P, Reddy M. Beyond Expertise Seeking: A field study of the informal knowledge practices of healthcare IT teams. In: Proceedings of CSCW'12. 2012;21:283-31
32. van den Heuvel E, Jowitt F, McIntyre A. Awareness, requirements and barriers to use of assistive technology designed to enable independence of people suffering from dementia. Technol Disabil. 2012;24:139-48.
33. Sugarhood P, Wherton J, Hinder S, Procter R, Greenhalgh T. Technology as system innovation: application of the diffusion of innovation model to telecare. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2013;9:79-87.
34. National Catalogue, ADL Smartcare website, www.adlsmartcare.com
35. Burrow S, Brooks D. AT dementia: an information resource on assistive technologies that support the independence of people with dementia. Dementia. 2012;11:553-7.
36. More Independent project website [ http://www.moreindependent.co.uk ]
37. Gibson G, Newton L, Prtichard G, Finch T, Brittain K, Robinson L. The provision of assistive technology products and services for people with dementia living in the United Kingdom. Dementia. 2014. doi:10.1177/1471301214532643
38. Lave J, Wenger E. Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1991.
39. Brown JS, Duguid P. Organizational learning and communities of practice: toward a unified view of working, learning and innovation. Organ Sci. 1991;2:40-57.
40. Orr J. Talking about machines: an ethnography of a modern job. New York: ILR Press; 1996.
41. Ranmuthugala G, Plumb J, Cunningham F, Georgiou A, Westbrook J, Braithwaite J. How and why are communities of practice established in the healthcare sector? A systematic review of the literature. 2011;11:273.
42. Cabitza F, Simone C. Renovated myths for the development of socially embedded technologies. arXiv preprint arXiv:1211.5577; 2012
43. Continua Alliance, www.continuaalliance.org
44. Covington H. Caring presence: delineation of a concept for holistic nursing. J Holist Nurs. 2003;21:301.
45. Halldorsdottir S. The dynamics of the nurse-patient relationship: introduction of a synthesized theory from the patient's perspective. Scand J Caring Sci. 2007;22:643-52.
46. Hyde P, Harris C, Boaden R. Pro-social organisational behaviour of health workers. Int J Hum Resour Manag. 2013;24:3115-30.
47. Kolowitz B, Lauro GR, Venturella J, Georgiev Y, Barone M. Clinical social networking: a new revolution in provider communication and delivery of clinical information across providers of care? J Digit Imaging. 2014;27:192-9.
48. Triantafyllidis AK, Koutkias VG, Chouvarda I, Maglaveras N. A pervasive health system integrating patient monitoring, status logging, and social sharing. IEE J Biomed Health Inform. 2013;17:30-7.
49. Schmidt K, Bannon L. Taking CSCW seriously: supporting articulation work. CSCW. 1992;1:7-40.
50. Bradner E. Social affordance of computer-mediated communication technology: understanding adoption. In: Proceedings of CHI EA. 2001. New York: ACM: 67-68
51. Reddy M, Dourish P, Pratt W. Coordinating heterogeneous work: information and representation in medical care. In: Proceedings of ECSCW. 2001. Netherlands: Springer:239-258
52. Clark HH. Using language. Cambridge: CUP; 1996.