"Research Jam": Engaging patients and other stakeholders through human-centered design to improve translational research.

Effective stakeholder engagement increases research relevance and utility. Though published principles of community-based participatory research and patient-centered outcomes research offer guidance, few resources offer effective techniques to engage stakeholders and translate their engagement into improvements in research process and outcomes. The Indiana Clinical and Translational Sciences Institute (Indiana CTSI) is home to Research Jam (RJ), an interdisciplinary team of researchers, project management professionals, and design experts, that employs human-centered design (HCD) to engage stakeholders in the research process. Establishing HCD services at the Indiana CTSI has allowed for accessible and innovative stakeholder-engaged research. RJ offers services for stakeholder-informed study design, measurement, implementation, and dissemination. RJ's services are in demand to address research barriers pertaining to a diverse array of health topics and stakeholder groups. As a result, the RJ team has grown significantly with both institutional and extramural support. Researchers involved in RJ projects report that working with RJ helped them learn how to better engage with stakeholders in research and changed the way they approach working with stakeholders. RJ can serve as a potential model for effectively engaging stakeholders through HCD to improve translational research.

Diabetes Prevention in Adolescents: Co-design Study Using Human-Centered Design Methodologies.

BACKGROUND: The rise in pediatric obesity and its accompanying condition, type 2 diabetes (T2D), is a serious public health concern. T2D in adolescents is associated with poor health outcomes and decreased life expectancy. Effective diabetes prevention strategies for high-risk adolescents and their families are urgently needed. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to co-design a diabetes prevention program for adolescents by using human-centered design methodologies. METHODS: We partnered with at-risk adolescents, parents, and professionals with expertise in diabetes prevention or those working with adolescents to conduct a series of human-centered design research sessions to co-design a diabetes prevention intervention for youth and their families. In order to do so, we needed to (1) better understand environmental factors that inhibit/promote recommended lifestyle changes to decrease T2D risk, (2) elucidate desired program characteristics, and (3) explore improved activation in diabetes prevention programs. RESULTS: Financial resources, limited access to healthy foods, safe places for physical activity, and competing priorities pose barriers to adopting lifestyle changes. Adolescents and their parents desire interactive, hands-on learning experiences that incorporate a sense of fun, play, and community in diabetes prevention programs. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study highlight important insights of 3 specific stakeholder groups regarding diabetes prevention and lifestyle changes. The findings of this study demonstrate that, with appropriate methods and facilitation, adolescents, parents, and professionals can be empowered to co-design diabetes prevention programs.

Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Eradication and Decolonization in Children Study (Part 2): Patient- and Parent-Centered Outcomes of Decolonization.

BACKGROUND: Skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs) due to community-acquired methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) can lead to a number of significant known medical outcomes including hospitalization, surgical procedures such as incision and drainage (I&D), and the need for decolonization procedures to remove the bacteria from the skin and nose and prevent recurrent infection. Little research has been done to understand patient and caregiver-centered outcomes associated with the successful treatment of MRSA infection. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to uncover MRSA decolonization outcomes that are important to patients and their parents in order to create a set of prototype measures for use in the MRSA Eradication and Decolonization in Children (MEDiC) study. METHODS: A 4-hour, human-centered design (HCD) workshop was held with 5 adolescents (aged 10-18 years) who had experienced an I&D procedure and 11 parents of children who had experienced an I&D procedure. The workshop explored the patient and family experience with skin infection to uncover patient-centered outcomes of MRSA treatment. The research team analyzed the audio and artifacts created during the workshop and coded for thematic similarity. The final themes represent patient-centered outcome domains to be measured in the MEDiC comparative effectiveness trial. RESULTS: The workshop identified 9 outcomes of importance to patients and their parents: fewer MRSA outbreaks, improved emotional health, improved self-perception, decreased social stigma, increased amount of free time, increased control over free time, fewer days of school or work missed, decreased physical pain and discomfort, and decreased financial burden. CONCLUSIONS: This study represents an innovative HCD approach to engaging patients and families with lived experience with MRSA SSTIs in the study design and trial development to determine meaningful patient-centered outcomes. We were able to identify 9 major recurrent themes. These themes were used to develop the primary and secondary outcome measures for MEDiC, a prospectively enrolling comparative effectiveness trial. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02127658; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02127658.

Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Eradication and Decolonization in Children Study (Part 1): Development of a Decolonization Toolkit With Patient and Parent Advisors.

BACKGROUND: Community-acquired methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) skin and soft tissue infections affect many healthy children. A significant number of these children are hospitalized and require surgical incision and drainage (I&D). Once sent home, these children and families are asked to complete burdensome home decolonization and hygiene procedures in an effort to prevent the high rate of recurrent infections. OBJECTIVE: This component of the Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus Eradication and Decolonization in Children (MEDiC) study aimed to develop a toolkit to assist MEDiC study participants in completing MRSA decolonization and hygiene procedures at home (the MEDiC kit). METHODS: In all, 5 adolescents (aged 10-18 years) who had undergone an I&D procedure for a skin infection and 11 parents of children who had undergone an I&D procedure for a skin infection were engaged in a 4-hour group workshop using a human-centered design approach. The topics covered in this workshop and analyzed for this paper were (1) attitudes about MRSA decolonization procedures and (2) barriers to the implementation of MRSA decolonization and hygiene procedures. The team analyzed the audio and artifacts created during the workshop and synthesized their findings to inform the creation of the MEDiC kit. RESULTS: The workshop activities uncovered barriers to successful completion of the decolonization and hygiene procedures: lack of step-by-step instruction, lack of proper tools in the home, concerns about adverse events, lack of control over some aspects of the hygiene procedures, and general difficulty coordinating all the procedures. Many of these could be addressed as part of the MEDiC kit. In addition, the workshop revealed that effective communication about decolonization would have to address concerns about the effects of bleach, provide detailed information, give reasons for the specific decolonization and hygiene protocol steps, and include step-by-step instructions (preferably through video). CONCLUSIONS: Through direct engagement with patients and families, we were able to better understand how to support families in implementing MRSA decolonization and hygiene protocols. In addition, we were able to better understand how to communicate about MRSA decolonization and hygiene protocols. With this knowledge, we created a robust toolkit that uses patient-driven language and visuals to help support patients and families through the implementation of these protocols. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02127658; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02127658.

Identifying patient-centered outcomes for children with cancer and their caregivers when they seek care in the emergency department.

BACKGROUND: Children with cancer have high utilization of the emergency department (ED), but little is known about which outcomes are most important to them and their caregivers when they seek care in the ED. PROCEDURE: A qualitative evaluation of ED experience for children with cancer and their caregivers was performed using self-reported interactive toolkits. Eligible participants included children with cancer (ages 11-19) and caregivers of children with cancer whose child received cancer therapy within the last year and had an ED visit within the last 2 years. Eligible participants received toolkits by mail and received incentives if they completed the toolkit. Toolkits were transcribed, thematically coded, and iteratively analyzed using Nvivo 11.0 software. RESULTS: There were 26 toolkits received-seven by children aged 11-17 years and 19 by caregivers (11 with children aged 2-7 years, eight with children aged 11-17 years). About half were from within 1 h of their treating institution. The most important outcomes to this population included system-level issues (eg, cleanliness of space, timeliness of evaluation) and oncology-provider- and ED-provider-level issues (eg, ability to access port-a-caths, quality of communication). Participants also identified outcomes that were within the control of the patient/caregiver, such as improving their sense of preparedness. CONCLUSION: The important outcomes to children with cancer and their caregivers when they seek care in the ED are distinct from current quality metrics. Future research should focus on the development and validation of a patient-centered outcomes tool.

Phase I of the Detecting and Evaluating Childhood Anxiety and Depression Effectively in Subspecialties (DECADES) Study: Development of an Integrated Mental Health Care Model for Pediatric Gastroenterology.

BACKGROUND: Children with gastrointestinal symptoms have a very high rate of anxiety and depression. Rapid identification of comorbid anxiety and depression is essential for effective treatment of a wide variety of functional gastrointestinal disorders. OBJECTIVE: The objective of our study was to determine patient and parent attitudes toward depression, anxiety, and mental health screening during gastroenterology (GI) visits and to determine patient and parent preferences for communication of results and referral to mental health providers after a positive screen. METHODS: We augmented standard qualitative group session methods with patient-centered design methods to assess patient and parent preferences. We used a variety of specific design methods in these sessions, including card sorting, projective methods, experience mapping, and constructive methods. RESULTS: Overall, 11 families (11 patients and 14 parents) participated in 2 group sessions. Overall, patients and their parents found integrated mental health care to be acceptable in the subspecialty setting. Patients' primary concerns were for the privacy and confidentiality of their screening results. Patients and their parents emphasized the importance of mental health services not interfering with the GI visit and collaboration between the GI physician, psychologist, and primary care provider. CONCLUSIONS: Patients and their families are open to integrated mental health care in the pediatric subspecialty clinic. The next phase of the DECADES study will translate patient and parent preferences into an integrated mental health care system and test its efficacy in the pediatric GI office.

Codesigned Shared Decision-Making Diabetes Management Plan Tool for Adolescents With Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus and Their Parents: Prototype Development and Pilot Test.

BACKGROUND: Adolescents with type 1 diabetes mellitus have difficulty achieving optimal glycemic control, partly due to competing priorities that interfere with diabetes self-care. Often, significant diabetes-related family conflict occurs, and adolescents' thoughts and feelings about diabetes management may be disregarded. Patient-centered diabetes outcomes may be better when adolescents feel engaged in the decision-making process. OBJECTIVE: The objective of our study was to codesign a clinic intervention using shared decision making for addressing diabetes self-care with an adolescent patient and parent advisory board. METHODS: The patient and parent advisory board consisted of 6 adolescents (teens) between the ages 12 and 18 years with type 1 diabetes mellitus and their parents recruited through our institution's Pediatric Diabetes Program. Teens and parents provided informed consent and participated in 1 or both of 2 patient and parent advisory board sessions, lasting 3 to 4 hours each. Session 1 topics were (1) patient-centered outcomes related to quality of life, parent-teen shared diabetes management, and shared family experiences; and (2) implementation and acceptability of a patient-centered diabetes care plan intervention where shared decision making was used. We analyzed audio recordings, notes, and other materials to identify and extract ideas relevant to the development of a patient-centered diabetes management plan. These data were visually coded into similar themes. We used the information to develop a prototype for a diabetes management plan tool that we pilot tested during session 2. RESULTS: Session 1 identified 6 principal patient-centered quality-of-life measurement domains: stress, fear and worry, mealtime struggles, assumptions and judgments, feeling abnormal, and conflict. We determined 2 objectives to be principally important for a diabetes management plan intervention: (1) focusing the intervention on diabetes distress and conflict resolution strategies, and (2) working toward a verbalized common goal. In session 2, we created the diabetes management plan tool according to these findings and will use it in a clinical trial with the aim of assisting with patient-centered goal setting. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus can be effectively engaged and involved in patient-centered research design. Teens with type 1 diabetes mellitus prioritize reducing family conflict and fitting into their social milieu over health outcomes at this time in their lives. It is important to acknowledge this when designing interventions to improve health outcomes in teens with type 1 diabetes mellitus.