User-centred health design: reflections on D4D’s experiences and challenges

References

• Clarkson, P.J., Buckle, P., Coleman, R., Stubbs, D., Ward, J., Jarrett, J., and Lane, R., 2004, Bound Design for patient safety: A review of the effectiveness of design in the UK Health Service. Journal of Engineering Design, 15, 123–140
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Horne, M., Khan, H., and Corrigan, P., 2013, People Powered Health: Health for people, by people, with people (London: NESTA). Available online at: http://www.nesta.org.uk/library/documents/PPHforpplbyppl2.pdf. Accessed 13 November 2014
   Google Scholar
• Parker, S., and Heapy, J., 2006, The Journey to the Interface: How public service design can connect users to reform (London, UK: Demos). Available online at: http://demos.co.uk/publications/thejourneytotheinterface. Accessed 13 November 2014
   Google Scholar
• Cottam, H., and Leadbeater, C., 2004, RED Paper 01 Health: Co-creating Services (London: Design Council) Available online at: http://www.hilarycottam.com/wp-content/uploads/(2010)/01/RED_Paper-01-Health_Co-creating_services.pdf. Accessed 13 November 2014
   Google Scholar
• Buckle, P., Clarkson, P.J., Coleman, R., Ward, J., and Anderson, J., 2006, Patient safety, systems design and ergonomics. Applied Ergonomics, 37, 491–500
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Furniss, D., O’Kane, A.A., Randell, R., Taneva, S., Mentis, H., and Blandford, A., 2013, HCI fieldwork in healthcare — Creating a guidebook. CHI ‘13 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, April 27-May 02, 2013, Paris, France. pp. 3203–83206
   Google Scholar
• Buckle, P., Clarkson, P.J., Coleman, R., Lane, R., Stubbs, D., Ward, J., Jarrett J., and Bound, R., 2003, Design for Patient Safety: A System-wide Design-led Approach to Tackling Patient Safety in the NHS (London: Department of Health Publications). Available online at: http://www-edc.eng.cam.ac.uk/medical/reports.html. Accessed 5 November 2014
   Google Scholar
• Clarkson, P.J., Buckle, P., Coleman, R., Stubbs, D., Ward, J., Jarrett, J., Lane, R., and Bound, R., 2004, Design for patient safety: A review of the effectiveness of design in the UK Health Service. Journal of Engineering Design, 15, 123–140
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yoxall, A., and Christer, K., 2013, Proceedings of the Second European Conference on Design 4 Health 2013, 3 – 5 July 2013. Sheffield Hallam University, Art & Design Research Centre, Sheffield, UK. ISBN: 978-1-84387-373-0
   Google Scholar
• Abras, C., Maloney-Krichmar, D., and Preece, J., 2004, User-Centered Design. In: Bainbridge, W., editor. Encyclopedia of Human-Computer Interaction (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage)
   Google Scholar
• Nielsen, J., 1993, Usability Engineering. Morgan Kaufmann (New York: Academic Press)
   Google Scholar
• Robert, G., 2007, Bringing User Experience to Healthcare Improvement: The Concepts, Methods and practices of experience-based design (Oxford: Radcliffe Publishing Ltd)
   Google Scholar
• Sanders, E.B.N., and Stappers, P.J., 2008, Co-creation and the new landscapes of design, CoDesign. International Journal of CoCreation in Design and the Arts, 4, 5–18
   Google Scholar
• Bias, R.G., and Mayhew, D.J., 2005, Cost-Justifying Usability: An Update for the Internet Age (San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers)
   Google Scholar
• Mayhew, D.J., 1999, The Usability Engineering Lifecycle (San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann). pp. 1–15
   Google Scholar
• International Organization for Standardization (ISO), 2009, Ergonomics of human-system interaction—Part 210: Human-centred design for interactive systems ISO 9241-210:2010 ISO Standards. (Switzerland: ISO) Available online at: http://www.iso.org/iso/home/store/catalogue_ics/catalogue_detail_ics.htm?csnumber=52075. Accessed 13 November 2014
   Google Scholar
• Kujala, S., 2003, User involvement: A review of the benefits and challenges. Behaviour and Information Technology, 22, 1–16
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shah, S.G.S., and Robinson, I., 2006, User involvement in healthcare technology development and assessment. International Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance, 19, 500–515
   Google Scholar
• Lee, S.H., 1999, Usability Testing for Developing Effective Interactive Multimedia Software: Concepts, Dimensions and Procedures. Educational Technology & Society, 2, 1436–1440
   Google Scholar
• Forrester Report, 2001, Get ROI from design (Cambridge, MA: Forrester Research, Inc.)
   Google Scholar
• Bevan, N., 2005, Cost benefits evidence and case studies (San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann) Available online at: http://www.usabilitynet.org/papers/Cost_benefits_evidence.pdf. Accessed 05/02/15
   Google Scholar
• De Vito Dabbs, A.I., Myers, B.A., Mc Curry, K.R., Dunbar-Jacob, J., Hawkins, R.P., Begey, A., and Dew, M.A., 2009, User-centered design and interactive health technologies for patients. Computers, Informatics, Nursing, 27, 175
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marti, P., and Bannon, L.J., 2009, Exploring user-centred design in practice: Some caveats. Knowledge, technology & Policy, 22, 7–15
   Google Scholar
• Martin, J.L., Norris, B.J., Murphy, E., and Crowe, J.A., 2008, Medical device development: The challenge for ergonomics. Applied Ergonomics, 39, 271–283
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Poulson, D., and Richardson, S., 1998, USERfit–a framework for user centred design in assistive technology. Technology and Disability, 9.3, 163–171
   Google Scholar
• Furniss, D., and Blandford, A., 2013, The challenge of doing fieldwork in healthcare. The Ergonomist, 19, 18
   Google Scholar
• Devices for Dignity Healthcare Technology Cooperative, 2014, Publication on project website (Sheffield: Devices for Dignity) Available online at: http://www.devicesfordignity.org.uk/. Accessed 13 November 2014
   Google Scholar
• Devices for Dignity Healthcare Technology Co-operative, 2014, Providing dignity and independence - linking, listening and learning through the pilot years 2008 to 2013. (Sheffield: Devices for Dignity) Available online at: http://www.devicesfordignity.org.uk/resources/news/247-d4d-end-of-pilot-report-2008-2013. Accessed 26 November 2014
   Google Scholar
• Heron, N., Tindale, W., and Hawley, M., 2010, Devices for Dignity; A Healthcare Technology Co-operative (AAATE). pp. 31–32. Available online at: http://www.aaate.net/sites/default/files/AAATEworkshopSheffield(2010)_proceedings.pdf#page=31. Accessed 19 November 2014
   Google Scholar
• Norman, D., 1998, The Design of Everyday Things (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press)
   Google Scholar
• Campbell, N.C., Murray, E., Darbyshire, J., Emery, J., Farmer, A., Griffiths, F., and Kinmonth, A.L., 2007, Designing and evaluating complex interventions to improve health care. British Medical Journal, 334, 455–459
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hewlett, S., Wit, M.D., Richards, P., Quest, E., Hughes, R., Heiberg, T., and Kirwan, J., 2006, Patients and professionals as research partners: Challenges, practicalities, and benefits. Arthritis Care & Research, 55, 676–680
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robertson, Z., Hawley, M., and Heron, N., 2010, Devices for Dignity in Practice Collaborative working to achieve technology transfer (AAATE). pp. 72–75. Available online at: http://www.aaate.net/sites/default/files/AAATEworkshopSheffield(2010)_proceedings.pdf#page=72. Accessed 19 November 2014
   Google Scholar
• Pagliari, C., 2007, Design and evaluation in eHealth: Challenges and implications for an interdisciplinary field. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 9, e15
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eason, K., 1987, Information technology and organizational change (London: Taylor and Francis)
   Google Scholar
• Owen, R., and Goldberg, N., 2010, Responsible innovation: A pilot study with the U.K. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council. Risk Analysis, 30, 1699–1707
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Curry, A., Stark, S., and Summerhill, L., 1999, Patient and stakeholder consultation in healthcare. Managing Service Quality, 5, 327–336
   Google Scholar
• Vink, P., Imadac, A.S., and Zinkd, K.J., 2008, Defining stakeholder involvement in participatory design processes. Applied Ergonomics, 39, 451–526
   Google Scholar
• Moody, L., Long, A., and McCarthy, A., 2014, Design for Health and Dignity: User and Stakeholder Involvement in Design for Urinary Continence. Advances in Human Aspects of Healthcare, 3, 58–63
   Google Scholar
• Department of Health, 2011, Operational guidance to the NHS: Extending Patient Choice of Provider (London: DoH)
   Google Scholar
• Moody, L., and McCarthy, A., 2015, Experiences of leg bag users and emerging design priorities. Journal of Wound Care, Ostomy and Continence, 42(2), 176–82
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Appleby, J., Harrison, A., and Devlin, N.J., 2003, What is the real cost of more patient choice? (London: King's Fund)
   Google Scholar
• Drug Tariff. Available online at: http://www.nhsbsa.nhs.uk/924.aspx. Accessed 20 November 2014
   Google Scholar
• John, L., Ross S., McLeod, C., and Gildiner, A., 2003, Measuring the impact of health research. Journal of Health Services Research & Policy, 8, 165–170
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Phillips, C., What is a QALY? Available online at: http://www.medicine.ox.ac.uk/bandolier/painres/download/whatis/QALY.pdf. Accessed 5 February 2015
   Google Scholar
• Dixon, S., Palfreyman, S., Shackley, P., and Brazier, J., 2011, What is dignity? A literature review and conceptual mapping. Discussion Paper. (Unpublished). Available online at: http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/43280/. Accessed 19 November 2014
   Google Scholar
• Health Research Authority, Available online at: http://www.hra.nhs.uk/about-the-hra/. Accessed 13 November 2014
   Google Scholar
• Thompson, A.G.1., and France, E.F., 2010, One stop or full stop? The continuing challenges for researchers despite the new streamlined NHS research governance process. BMC Health Services Research, 10, 124
   Google Scholar
• McDonach, E., Barbour, R., and Williams, B., 2009, Reflections on applying for NHS ethical approval and governance in a climate of rapid change: Prioritising process over principles. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 12(3), 227–241
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alberti, K.G., 2000, Multicentre research ethics committees: Has the cure been worse than the disease? But idiosyncrasies and obstructions to good research must be removed. British Medical Journal, 320, 1157–1158
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lux, A.L., Edwards, S.W., and Osborne, J.P., 2000, Responses of local research ethics committees to a study with approval from a multicentre research ethics committee. British Medical Journal, 320, 1182
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Health Research Authority, 2013, Defining Research (London: NHS Health Research Authority) Available online at: http://www.hra.nhs.uk/documents/(2013)/09/defining-research.pdf. Accessed 13 November 2014
   Google Scholar
• Dickson-Swift, V., James, E.J., Kippen, S., and Liamputtong, P., 2007, Doing sensitive research: What challenges do qualitative researchers face? Qualitative Research, 7, 327–353
   Google Scholar
• Garcia, J.A., Crocker, J., and Wyman, J.F., 2005, Breaking the Cycle of Stigmatization: Managing the Stigma of Incontinence in Social Interactions. Journal of Wound, Ostomy & Continence Nursing, 32, 38–52
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kavanaugh, K., and Lioness, A., 1998, ‘Not as bad as it could have been’: Assessing and mitigating harm during research interviews on sensitive topics. Research in Nursing & Health, 21, 91–97
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Joss, N., and Oldenburg, B., 2013, Costs and benefits of end user engagement in disability research: A snapshot review. ISCRR research report for WorkSafe/TAC (Melbourne: ISCRR)
   Google Scholar
• Scott, W.D., Woodcock, A., and McDonagh, D., 2015, An investigation of the methods used by designers to engage with users that have Specific, Critical, Additional Needs (SCAN). International Journal of Design Management and Professional Practice, 8, 1–13
   Google Scholar
• Judge, S., and Townend, G., 2010, Users’ perceptions of communication aid design - D4D project report. (Sheffield: Devices for Dignity)
   Google Scholar
• Clarke, Z., Judge, S., Heron, N., Langley, J., Hosking, I., and Hawley, M. S., 2011, User involvement in the early development of assistive technology devices. In: Gelderblom, G.J., Adriaens, L. (eds.) Everyday Technology for Independence and Care - AAATE 2011 (Maastricht, The Netherlands: IOS Press). pp. 362–373
   Google Scholar
• Thieme, A., Vines, J., Wallace, J., Clarke, R.E., Slovák, P., McCarthy, J., and Parker, A.G., 2014, Enabling empathy in health and care: Design methods and challenges. CHI 2014 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. (New York: AMC Press) 139–142
   Google Scholar
• Moody, L., and McCarthy, A., 2011, Improving the design of leg bags. BB&F: The Journal of the Bladder and Bowel Foundation, 7, 12–13
   Google Scholar
• Berander, P., and Andrews, A., 2005, Requirements prioritization. Engineering and managing software requirements (Heidelberg: Springer Berlin). pp. 69–94
   Google Scholar
• Akao, Y., 1988, Quality Function Deployment: Integrating Customer Requirements into Product Design (Cambridge, MA: Productivity Press)
   Google Scholar
• Saaty, L., 1980, The Analytical Hierarchy Process (New York: McGraw-Hill)
   Google Scholar
• Ijzerman, M.J., Van Til, J.A., and Bridges, J.F., 2012, A comparison of analytic hierarchy process and conjoint analysis methods in assessing treatment alternatives for stroke rehabilitation. The Patient-Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, 5, 45–56
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karlsson, J., and Ryan, K., 1997, A cost-value approach for prioritizing requirements. IEEE Software, 14, 67–74
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Damodaran, L., 1996, User involvement in the systems design process-a practical guide for users. Behaviour & Information Technology, 15, 363–377
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Druin, A., 2002, The role of children in the design of new technology. Behaviour and Information Technology, 21, 1–25
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilson, S., Bekker, M., Johnson, P., and Johnson, H., 1997, Helping and hindering user involvement—a tale of everyday design. Proceedings of the ACM SIGCHI Conference on Human factors in computing systems, ACM, pp. 178–185
   Google Scholar
• Wilson, S., Bekker, M., Johnson, H., and Johnson, P., 1996, Costs and benefits of user involvement in design: Practitioners’ views. People and Computers XI (London: Springer). pp. 221–240
   Google Scholar
• Ulrich, R.S., Zimring, C.M., Zhu, X., DuBose, J., Seo, H., Choi, Y., Quan, X., and Joseph, A., 2008, A review of the research literature on evidence-based healthcare design. Health Environments Research & Design, 1, 61–125
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lipson, H., and Kurman, M., 2013, Fabricated: The new world of 3D printing (Indianapolis, IN: John Wiley & Sons)
   Google Scholar
• Giannatsis, J., and Dedoussis, V., 2009, Additive fabrication technologies applied to medicine and health care: A review. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 40, 116–127
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) Available online at: http://www.mhra.gov.uk/Howweregulate/Devices/Classification/. Accessed 20 November 2014
   Google Scholar
• Heathfield, H., Pitty, D., and Hanka, R., 1998, Evaluating information technology in health care: Barriers and challenges. British Medical Journal, 316, 1959–1961
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dymond, E., Long, A., McCarthy, A., and Drake, M.J., 2012, Developing a new treatment device: How to get an idea to the marketplace. Neurourology and Urodynamics, 31, 429–436
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Council of the European Union, 1993, European Medical Device Directive (93/42/EEC). (Online: European Commission) Available online at: http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/european-standards/harmonised-standards/medical-devices/index_en.htm. Accessed 24 November 2014
   Google Scholar
• Mangera, A., Marzo, A., Heron, N., Fernando, D., Hameed, K., Soliman, A.H.A., and Chapple, C., 2014, Development of two electronic bladder diaries: A patient and healthcare professionals pilot study. Neurourology & Urodynamics, 33, 1101–1109
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar