Using Codesign to Develop a Health Literacy Intervention to Improve the Accessibility and Acceptability of Cardiac Services: The Equal Hearts Study

IF 3 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Denise Azar, Sofia Wang, Liz Flemming-Judge, Anna Wong Shee, Rebecca Jessup, Laveena Sharma, Shihoko Fukumori, Jason Talevski, Stephen J. Nicholls, James Harris, Laura Alston, Catherine Martin, Ernesto Oqueli, William van Gaal, Alison Beauchamp
{"title":"Using Codesign to Develop a Health Literacy Intervention to Improve the Accessibility and Acceptability of Cardiac Services: The Equal Hearts Study","authors":"Denise Azar,&nbsp;Sofia Wang,&nbsp;Liz Flemming-Judge,&nbsp;Anna Wong Shee,&nbsp;Rebecca Jessup,&nbsp;Laveena Sharma,&nbsp;Shihoko Fukumori,&nbsp;Jason Talevski,&nbsp;Stephen J. Nicholls,&nbsp;James Harris,&nbsp;Laura Alston,&nbsp;Catherine Martin,&nbsp;Ernesto Oqueli,&nbsp;William van Gaal,&nbsp;Alison Beauchamp","doi":"10.1111/hex.70328","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Introduction</h3>\n \n <p>The burden of coronary heart disease (CHD) is disproportionately greater among socio-economically disadvantaged groups. Health services play a crucial role in addressing this social gradient by ensuring equitable access to care. However, there is limited evidence on effective strategies to improve health service accessibility for CHD patients, particularly those that are codesigned with people with lived experience and clinicians. The Equal Hearts study aimed to codesign a health literacy-based intervention to improve the accessibility of hospital-based cardiac services for underserved population groups with CHD.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>This study employed a mixed-methods approach based on codesign principles. The study comprises three phases: identifying and understanding the problem, codeveloping an intervention, and translating the intervention into practice. Phases 1 and 2 are reported in this paper and included focus groups, interviews and an intervention development workshop. Participants for focus groups and interviews were recruited from four health services in [Victoria] and included patients with CHD, health consumers from culturally diverse communities and clinicians. Findings from focus groups and interviews were analysed via thematic analysis using Levesque's conceptual framework to identify health literacy barriers to accessibility of cardiac services. These barriers were prioritised in a codesign workshop with cardiac patients, health consumers and clinicians.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Thirty-seven cardiac patients, 10 clinicians and 44 culturally diverse health consumers participated in focus groups/interviews. Among these participants, eight cardiac patients/carers and five clinicians attended the workshop. Cardiac patients reported a lack of preparedness for hospital discharge and feeling ‘lost’ and uncertain about how to confidently manage their health at home after a cardiac event. A codesigned intervention—The Patient Discharge Action Plan—aims to improve patients' transition from hospital to home.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Using a codesign approach and health literacy principles, a health service intervention was developed to improve accessibility of cardiac services. The Patient Discharge Action Plan is currently being evaluated in a pilot RCT.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Patient or Public Contribution</h3>\n \n <p>Two consumer co-authors [L.F.J. and J.H.] informed the development of the study protocol. A Stakeholder Advisory Panel, including six people with lived experience of CHD and four clinicians/health service managers from participating sites, guided all steps within this study.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Trial Registration</h3>\n \n <p>ACTRN12624000780550p (Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry). Registered on 25 June 2024.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":55070,"journal":{"name":"Health Expectations","volume":"28 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/hex.70328","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Expectations","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/hex.70328","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

The burden of coronary heart disease (CHD) is disproportionately greater among socio-economically disadvantaged groups. Health services play a crucial role in addressing this social gradient by ensuring equitable access to care. However, there is limited evidence on effective strategies to improve health service accessibility for CHD patients, particularly those that are codesigned with people with lived experience and clinicians. The Equal Hearts study aimed to codesign a health literacy-based intervention to improve the accessibility of hospital-based cardiac services for underserved population groups with CHD.

Methods

This study employed a mixed-methods approach based on codesign principles. The study comprises three phases: identifying and understanding the problem, codeveloping an intervention, and translating the intervention into practice. Phases 1 and 2 are reported in this paper and included focus groups, interviews and an intervention development workshop. Participants for focus groups and interviews were recruited from four health services in [Victoria] and included patients with CHD, health consumers from culturally diverse communities and clinicians. Findings from focus groups and interviews were analysed via thematic analysis using Levesque's conceptual framework to identify health literacy barriers to accessibility of cardiac services. These barriers were prioritised in a codesign workshop with cardiac patients, health consumers and clinicians.

Results

Thirty-seven cardiac patients, 10 clinicians and 44 culturally diverse health consumers participated in focus groups/interviews. Among these participants, eight cardiac patients/carers and five clinicians attended the workshop. Cardiac patients reported a lack of preparedness for hospital discharge and feeling ‘lost’ and uncertain about how to confidently manage their health at home after a cardiac event. A codesigned intervention—The Patient Discharge Action Plan—aims to improve patients' transition from hospital to home.

Conclusion

Using a codesign approach and health literacy principles, a health service intervention was developed to improve accessibility of cardiac services. The Patient Discharge Action Plan is currently being evaluated in a pilot RCT.

Patient or Public Contribution

Two consumer co-authors [L.F.J. and J.H.] informed the development of the study protocol. A Stakeholder Advisory Panel, including six people with lived experience of CHD and four clinicians/health service managers from participating sites, guided all steps within this study.

Trial Registration

ACTRN12624000780550p (Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry). Registered on 25 June 2024.

使用协同设计开发健康素养干预以提高心脏服务的可及性和可接受性:平等心脏研究
冠心病(CHD)的负担在社会经济弱势群体中不成比例地更大。卫生服务通过确保公平获得保健服务,在解决这一社会梯度方面发挥着至关重要的作用。然而,关于改善冠心病患者卫生服务可及性的有效策略的证据有限,特别是那些与有生活经验的人和临床医生共同设计的策略。平等心脏研究旨在共同设计一种基于健康素养的干预措施,以改善服务不足的冠心病人群获得医院心脏服务的可及性。方法本研究采用基于协同设计原则的混合方法。研究包括三个阶段:识别和理解问题,共同制定干预措施,将干预措施转化为实践。第一阶段和第二阶段报告在本文中,包括焦点小组,访谈和干预发展研讨会。焦点小组和访谈的参与者从[维多利亚]的四个卫生服务机构中招募,包括冠心病患者、来自不同文化社区的卫生消费者和临床医生。使用Levesque的概念框架,通过专题分析分析焦点小组和访谈的结果,以确定获得心脏服务的健康素养障碍。在与心脏病患者、保健消费者和临床医生共同设计的研讨会上,优先考虑了这些障碍。结果37名心脏病患者、10名临床医生和44名不同文化的健康消费者参与了焦点小组/访谈。在这些参加者中,有八名心脏病病人/护理员及五名临床医生参加了工作坊。心脏病患者报告说,他们对出院缺乏准备,感到“失落”,不确定如何在心脏病发作后自信地在家管理自己的健康。一项共同设计的干预措施——病人出院行动计划——旨在改善病人从医院到家庭的过渡。结论采用协同设计方法和健康素养原则,开发了一种卫生服务干预措施,以提高心脏服务的可及性。病人出院行动计划目前正在一项试点随机对照试验中进行评估。两名消费者合著者[j][J.H.]为研究方案的制定提供了信息。一个利益相关者咨询小组,包括6名有冠心病生活经验的人和4名来自参与地点的临床医生/卫生服务经理,指导了本研究的所有步骤。试验注册ACTRN12624000780550p(澳大利亚和新西兰临床试验注册)。于2024年6月25日注册。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Health Expectations
Health Expectations 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
9.40%
发文量
251
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Health Expectations promotes critical thinking and informed debate about all aspects of patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) in health and social care, health policy and health services research including: • Person-centred care and quality improvement • Patients'' participation in decisions about disease prevention and management • Public perceptions of health services • Citizen involvement in health care policy making and priority-setting • Methods for monitoring and evaluating participation • Empowerment and consumerism • Patients'' role in safety and quality • Patient and public role in health services research • Co-production (researchers working with patients and the public) of research, health care and policy Health Expectations is a quarterly, peer-reviewed journal publishing original research, review articles and critical commentaries. It includes papers which clarify concepts, develop theories, and critically analyse and evaluate specific policies and practices. The Journal provides an inter-disciplinary and international forum in which researchers (including PPIE researchers) from a range of backgrounds and expertise can present their work to other researchers, policy-makers, health care professionals, managers, patients and consumer advocates.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信