i-Rebound after Stroke-Eat for Health: Mediterranean Dietary Intervention Co-Design Using an Integrated Knowledge Translation Approach and the TIDieR Checklist

Co-design for stroke intervention development: Results of a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Co-design methodology seeks to actively engage end-users in developing interventions. It is increasingly used to design stroke interventions; however, limited guidance exists, particularly with/for individuals with stroke who have diverse cognitive, physical and functional abilities. Thus, we describe 1) the extent of existing research that has used co-design for stroke intervention development and 2) how co-design has been used to develop stroke interventions among studies that explicitly used co-design, including the rationale, types of co-designed stroke interventions, participants involved, research methodologies/approaches, methods of incorporating end-users in the research, co-design limitations, challenges and potential strategies reported by researchers.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A scoping review informed by Joanna Briggs Institute and Arksey & O'Malley methodology was conducted by searching nine databases on December 21, 2022, to locate English-language literature that used co-design to develop a stroke intervention. Additional data sources were identified through a hand search. Data sources were de-duplicated, and two research team members reviewed their titles, abstracts and full text to ensure they met the inclusion criteria. Data relating to the research objectives were extracted, analyzed, and reported numerically and descriptively.

RESULTS

Data sources used co-design for stroke intervention development with (n = 89) and without (n = 139) explicitly using the term 'co-design.' Among studies explicitly using co-design, it was commonly used to understand end-user needs and generate new ideas. Many co-designed interventions were technology-based (65%), and 48% were for physical rehabilitation or activity-based. Co-design was commonly conducted with multiple participants (82%; e.g., individuals with stroke, family members/caregivers and clinicians) and used various methods to engage end-users, including focus groups and workshops. Limitations, challenges and potential strategies for recruitment, participant-engagement, contextual and logistical and ethics of co-designed interventions were described.

CONCLUSIONS

Given the increasing popularity of co-design as a methodology for developing stroke interventions internationally, these findings can inform future co-designed studies.

Secondary prevention of stroke. A telehealth-delivered physical activity and diet pilot randomized trial (ENAbLE-pilot)

BACKGROUND

Improving physical activity levels and diet quality are important for secondary stroke prevention.

AIM

To test the feasibility and safety of 6-month, co-designed telehealth-delivered interventions to increase physical activity and improve diet quality.

METHODS

A 2 × 2 factorial trial (physical activity (PA); diet (DIET); PA + DIET; control) randomized, open-label, blinded endpoint trial. Primary outcomes were feasibility and safety. Secondary outcomes included stroke risk factors (blood pressure, self-report PA (International Physical Activity Questionnaire (IPAQ)) and diet quality (Australian Recommended Food Score (ARFS)), and quality of life. Between-group differences were analyzed using linear-mixed models.

RESULTS

Over 23 months, 99 people were screened for participation and 40 (40%) randomized (3 months to 10 years post-stroke, mean age 59 (16) years). Six participants withdrew, and an additional five were lost to follow-up. Fifteen serious adverse events were reported, but none were deemed definitely or probably related to the intervention. Median attendance was 32 (of 36) PA sessions and 9 (of 10) DIET sessions. The proportion of missing primary outcome data (blood pressure) was 3% at 3 months, 11% at 6 months, and 14% at 12 months. Between-group 95% confidence intervals showed promising, clinically relevant differences in support of the interventions across the range of PA, diet quality, and blood pressure outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Our telehealth PA and diet interventions were safe and feasible and may have led to significant behavior change.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ACTRN12620000189921.

Health risk factors in Australian Stroke Survivors: A latent class analysis

ISSUES ADDRESSED

To (i) determine the prevalence of health risk factors (physical activity, diet, alcohol, smoking, blood pressure medication use and mental health) in community-dwelling stroke survivors; and (ii) examine how these health risk factors cluster, and identify associations with physical functioning, independent living, or sociodemographic factors.

METHODS

A secondary analysis of data obtained during a national randomised controlled trial. Participants had experienced stroke and completed a baseline telephone survey on demographic and stroke characteristics, health risk factors, physical functioning and independence in activities of daily living. A latent class analysis was performed to determine health risk profiles. Univariate logistic regressions were performed to identify if participant characteristics were associated with resulting classes.

RESULTS

Data analysed from 399 participants. Two classes of health risk factors were identified: Low Mood, Food & Moves Risk (16% of participants) and Alcohol Use Risk (84% of participants). The Low Mood, Food & Moves Risk group had poorer diet quality, lower physical activity levels and higher levels of depression and anxiety. Lower levels of independence and physical functioning were predictor variables for this group. In contrast, the Alcohol Use Risk group had better physical activity and diet scores, significantly lower probability of depression and anxiety, but a higher probability of risky drinking.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified two distinct health risk factor groups in our population. SO WHAT?: Future interventions may benefit from targeting the specific needs and requirements of people who have experienced stroke based on their distinct risk group. Alcohol consumption in poststroke populations requires further attention.

Co-designing nutrition interventions with consumers: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

There is little known about nutrition intervention research involving consumer co-design. The aim of this scoping review was to identify and synthesise the existing evidence on the current use and extent of consumer co-design in nutrition interventions.

METHODS

This scoping review is in line with the methodological framework developed by Arksey and O'Malley and refined by the Joanna Briggs Institute using an adapted 2weekSR approach. We searched Medline, EMBASE, PsycInfo, CINAHL and Cochrane. Only studies that included consumers in the co-design and met the 'Collaborate' or 'Empower' levels of the International Association of Public Participation's Public Participation Spectrum were included. Studies were synthesised according to two main concepts: (1) co-design for (2) nutrition interventions.

RESULTS

The initial search yielded 8157 articles, of which 19 studies were included (comprising 29 articles). The studies represented a range of intervention types and participants from seven countries. Sixteen studies were published in the past 5 years. Co-design was most often used for intervention development, and only two studies reported a partnership with consumers across all stages of research. Overall, consumer involvement was not well documented. No preferred co-design framework or approach was reported across the various studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Consumer co-design for nutrition interventions has become more frequent in recent years, but genuine partnerships with consumers across all stages of nutrition intervention research remain uncommon. There is an opportunity to improve the reporting of consumer involvement in co-design and enable equal partnerships with consumers in nutrition research.

Scoping review protocol of the use of codesign methods in stroke intervention development

INTRODUCTION

Codesign is an emerging research method to enhance intervention development by actively engaging non-researchers (eg, people who have had a stroke, caregivers and clinicians) in research. The involvement of non-researchers in research is becoming increasingly popular within health studies as it may produce more relevant and effective findings. The stroke population commonly exhibits challenges such as aphasia and cognitive changes that may limit their participation in codesign. However, the use of codesign within the stroke literature has not been comprehensively reviewed. This scoping review will determine: (1) what is the extent, range and nature of stroke research that has used codesign methods? (2) What codesign methods have been used to develop stroke interventions? (3) What considerations for codesigning interventions with people who have stroke are not captured in the findings?

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a protocol for a scoping review to identify the literature relating to stroke, and codesign will be conducted on OVID Medline, OVID Embase, OVID PsychINFO, EBSCO CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, Scopus, PEDro-Physiotherapy Evidence Database and Global Index Medicus. Studies of any design and publication date will be included. Title and abstract and full-text review will be conducted independently by two reviewers. Data will be extracted, collated and then summarised descriptively using quantitative (eg, numerical descriptions) and qualitative (eg, textual descriptions) methods. Numerical summaries will map the extent (eg, number of studies), range (eg, types of studies) and nature (eg, types of interventions developed) of the literature on this topic. A thematic analysis will provide insights into the codesign methods (eg, activities, non-researchers), including heterogeneity across and within studies.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This review protocol does not require ethics approval as data has not been collected/analysed. The findings will highlight opportunities and recommendations to inform future codesign research in stroke and other populations who exhibit similar challenges/disabilities, and they will be disseminated via publications, presentations and stakeholder meetings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERREGISTRATION

Open Science Framework: 10.17605/OSF.IO/NSD2W.

Use of co-design methodology in the development of cardiovascular disease secondary prevention interventions: A scoping review

INTRODUCTION

There is growing evidence to support the use of co-design in developing interventions across many disciplines. This scoping review aims to examine how co-design methodology has been used in the development of cardiovascular disease (CVD) secondary prevention interventions within health and community settings.

METHODS

We searched four academic databases for studies that used the co-design approach to develop their intervention. Studies were included if consumers (adults with CVD) and key stakeholders (e.g. clinicians, service providers) were involved in the co-design process. The review focused on methodology rather than traditional study outcomes; therefore, co-design processes and activities were extracted and evaluated against a selected co-design framework.

RESULTS

Twenty-two studies were included in this review. Studies were implemented across various settings with consumers and stakeholder groups most frequently consisting of patients and healthcare professionals, respectively. Most studies specifically stated that they used a 'co-design' approach (n = 10); others used terms such as participatory action research (n = 3), user-centred design (n = 3) and community-based participatory research (n = 2). Although there was variability in terminology, co-design processes, and participants, all studies adhered to the key principles of consumer engagement. Predominant co-design activities included semistructured interviews, focus groups, co-design/development workshops and advisory group meetings. Intervention effectiveness was assessed in eight studies showing mixed results.

CONCLUSIONS

This review provides an overview of how the co-design approach has previously been used in the development of CVD secondary prevention interventions. These findings provide methodological considerations that can guide researchers and healthcare services when implementing co-design to develop feasible and acceptable interventions that can improve outcomes for CVD populations.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

No patients, service users, caregivers, people with lived experience or members of the public were involved in this scoping review. This review article was written by academics who have undertaken a significant amount of co-design work with consumers and stakeholders.

Designing an online intervention for adults with addictive eating: a qualitative integrated knowledge translation approach

INTRODUCTION

Codesign is a meaningful end-user engagement in research design. The integrated knowledge translation (IKT) framework involves adopting a collaborative research approach to produce and apply knowledge to address real-world needs, resulting in useful and useable recommendations that will more likely be applied in policy and practice. In the field of food addiction (FA), there are limited treatment options that have been reported to show improvements in FA symptoms.

OBJECTIVES

The primary aim of this paper is to describe the step-by-step codesign and refinement of a complex intervention delivered via telehealth for adults with FA using an IKT approach. The secondary aim is to describe our intervention in detail according to the TIDieR checklist.

DESIGN

This study applies the IKT process and describes the codesign and refinement of an intervention through a series of online meetings, workshops and interviews.

PARTICIPANTS

This study included researchers, clinicians, consumers and health professionals.

PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE

The primary outcome was a refined intervention for use in adults with symptoms of FA for a research trial.

RESULTS

A total of six female health professionals and five consumers (n=4 female) with lived overeating experience participated in two interviews lasting 60 min each. This process resulted in the identification of eight barriers and three facilitators to providing and receiving treatment for FA, eight components needed or missing from current treatments, telehealth as a feasible delivery platform, and refinement of key elements to ensure the intervention met the needs of both health professionals and possible patients.

CONCLUSION

Using an IKT approach allowed for a range of viewpoints and enabled multiple professions and disciplines to engage in a semiformalised way to bring expertise to formulate a possible intervention for FA. Mapping the intervention plan to the TIDieR checklist for complex interventions, allowed for detailed description of the intervention and the identification of a number of areas that needed to be refined before development of the finalised intervention protocol.