Co-designing a behavioural intervention for reducing the impact of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy symptoms: An evidence- and theory-driven approach.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to co-design an evidence- and theory-based behavioural intervention to reduce the impact of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) symptoms on patients' quality of life. METHODS: Guided by the Medical Research Council Framework for developing and evaluating complex interventions, our intervention development process was guided by (a) findings of systematic reviews, (b) inductive analysis of 39 h of observational fieldwork, 12 patient and 11 clinician interviews, (c) deductive analysis using the Common-Sense Model to develop a Self-Regulation Model of CIPN and (d) 17 patients and 18 clinicians co-designing the intervention. RESULTS: CIPN perception and coping behaviours were highlighted as processes to target when co-designing an intervention. The processes targeted in our intervention are CIPN perception and coping behaviours, namely, (a) self-monitoring of symptoms, (b) communicating and early reporting of symptoms to clinicians, (c) participating in making chemotherapy dose reduction decisions with their clinicians and (d) engaging in self-management and safety strategies to reduce impact of CIPN symptoms. To address these, a behavioural intervention was deemed suitable. CONCLUSION: We developed a self-regulation model of CIPN and a logic model for documenting the proposed mechanism of action of our co-designed behavioural intervention for reducing impact of CIPN symptoms.

Co-designing a cancer care intervention: reflections of participants and a doctoral researcher on roles and contributions.

BACKGROUND: Patient and Public Involvement is most usually framed in the context of designing, conducting and/or disseminating research. Participatory methods such as Experience-Based Co-Design (EBCD) further allow service users to directly engage in developing, testing and implementing interventions and services alongside healthcare staff. This paper aims to explore how participants in an EBCD project came-over time-to perceive their role and involvement in co-designing a cancer care intervention. METHODS: The findings are based on our reflections, a research diary, email correspondence and fieldnotes from co-design events. Co-design participants who attended most of the ten co-design events took part through written reflections or audio-recorded video calls. Ten reflective pieces were collected from clinicians (n = 4), PPI group members/patient participants (n = 4), a doctoral researcher (n = 1) and a visual illustrator (n = 1). Inductive data analysis of participant reflections was carried out using reflexive thematic analysis. Meeting fieldnotes, email correspondence and the researcher's diary were deductively analysed using the initial themes generated from this inductive analysis. RESULTS: Five main themes were identified: (1) changing perception of roles during the co-design process, (2) defining a 'co-designer', (3) engagement and ownership, (4) role of the research facilitator in maintaining momentum, and (5) perceived benefits of involvement. CONCLUSION: Our findings show the changing perceptions of roles and contributions among participants over time. Patients typically described their role as co-designers in terms simply of sharing their experiences. In contrast, clinicians perceived themselves as co-designers because they were working with patients who were actively involved in decision-making. Levels of engagement were affected by several factors such as time and facilitation, but most participants came to view themselves as co-owners of the intervention. Overall, participants perceived their involvement as a positive experience with clinicians also reporting wider positive impacts on their clinical practice.

Experience-Based Co-Design is a method for helping patients and clinicians work together to improve healthcare services. Studies of participant experiences in projects which use this method and how they perceive the co-designer role are rare. Our study explores how we­patients and clinicians­saw our role and participation as co-designers over time. Our findings are based on our written and verbal reflections of participating in a co-design project aimed at developing an information resource booklet and film for use in cancer care. We also analysed meeting records, email messages between participants and a reflective diary kept by the researcher who was coordinating the project. Our findings show that views of our roles and contributions as co-design participants changed over time. Patients tended to see themselves as 'co-designers' simply because they shared their experiences throughout the co-design process. In contrast, clinicians saw themselves as 'co-designers' because they were working together with patients and making decisions with them. Factors such as time demands, and the skill of the facilitator affected the commitment of participants to co-design activities. Most participants regard the ownership of the newly developed information resources as being shared. Overall, we viewed our participation in the co-design project as a positive experience with results that will benefit clinical practice.