Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
##common.pageHeaderLogo.altText##

Articles

No. 2(23) (2022): Culture of Design

Case Study: Implementation of Participatory Design in a Health-Tech Project: Did the Patient Participatory Design Group Follow the Principles of Participatory Design and Which Relevant Themes in Regard to the Method as a Whole Were Revealed?

DOI
https://doi.org/10.51196/srz.23.11
Submitted
July 2, 2022
Published
2023-10-09

Abstract

The goal of this article is to present the characteristics and challenges of the participatory design (PD) process in healthcare, in connection with an evaluation of the PD process in the People and Medicine Foundation’s project – Patients4Patients. The main objective was to design and implement a new module in the Patients4Patients mobile app. The evaluation tried to answer the questions of (1) to what degree the proposed participatory process aligned with participatory design principles, and (2) to what degree the participants felt empowered and engaged in the designing and decision-making process. The results suggest that the implementation of PD was successful. At the same time, new aspects were revealed that have not been widely discussed in the literature on successful PD projects in e-healthcare, namely digital and conditional accessibility, and the importance of the group process

References

  1. Arnstein S. 2011 [1969]. A Ladder of Citizen Participation, „Journal of the American Institute of Planners, The City Reader”, s. 239–250.
  2. Bannon L.J., Ehn P. 2013. Design: Design Matters in Participatory Design, [w:] Routledge International Handbook of Participatory Design, red. J. Simonsen, T. Robertson, Routledge, s. 37–63.
  3. Barełkowski R. 2014. Problemy implementacji projektowania partycypacyjnego w Polsce, „Przestrzeń i Forma” 22, nr 3, s. 25–46.
  4. Blomberg J., Karasti H. 2013. Ethnography: Positioning Ethnography within Participatory Design, [w:] Routledge International Handbook of Participatory Design, red. J. Simonsen, T. Robertson, Routledge, s. 86–116.
  5. Bowen S., Dearden A., Wright P., Wolstenholme D., Cobb M. 2010. Participatory Healthcare Service Design and Innovation, [w:] Proceedings of the Participatory Design Conference – PDC’10, ACM Press, s. 155–158.
  6. Bowen S. i in. 2013. How Was It for You? Experiences of Participatory Design in the UK Health Service, „CoDesign”, s. 230–246.
  7. Boyd K.M. 2000. Disease, Illness, Sickness, Health, Healing and Wholeness: Exploring Some Elusive Concepts, „Medical Humanities” 26, s. 9–17.
  8. Brandt E., Binder T., Sanders E.B.N. 2013. Tools and Techniques: Ways to Engage Telling, Making and Enacting, [w:] Routledge International Handbook of Participatory Design, red. J. Simonsen, T. Robertson, Routledge, s. 145–181.
  9. Bratteteig T. i in. 2013. Participatory Methods: Organizing Principles and General Guidelines for Participatory Design Projects, [w:] Routledge International Handbook of Participatory Design, red. J. Simonsen, T. Robertson, Routledge, s. 117–144.
  10. Carpentier N., Melo A.D., Ribeiro F. 2019. Rescuing Participation: A Critique on the Dark Participation Concept, „Comunicação e sociedade” 36, s. 17–35.
  11. Charycka B. 2017. Organizacje pacjentów w Polsce – struktura, aktywności, potrzeby, Stowarzyszenie Klon/Jawor. http://ippez.pl/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Struktura-aktywnosci-potrzeby-raport.pdf; dostęp: 10.06.2022.
  12. Connor D.M. 1988. A New Ladder of Citizen Participation, „National Civic Review” 77, nr 3, s. 249–257.
  13. Czahajda R. 2019. Dlaczego Tuckman nie jest dobrym modelem opisującym proces grupowy? https://epale.ec.europa.eu/sr/node/117446; dostęp: 15.06.2022.
  14. Dale J., Caramlau I.O., Lindenmeyer A., Williams S.M. 2008. Peer Support Telephone Calls for Improving Health, „Cochrane Database Syst. Rev.” 4. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7386897/#CD006903-bbs2-0006; dostęp: 4.03.2023.
  15. DiSalvo C., Clement A., Pipek V. 2013. Communities: Participatory Design for, with and by Communities, [w:] Routledge International Handbook of Participatory Design, red. J. Simonsen, T. Robertson, Routledge, s. 182–210.
  16. Dubin R.E. i in. 2017. Acknowledging Stigma: Its Presence in Patient Care and Medical Education, „Canadian Family Physician. Medecin de famille canadien” 63, nr 12, s. 906–908.
  17. Elizarova O., Dowd K. 2017 Participatory Design in Practice. https://ux-mag.com/articles/participatory-design-in-practice; dostęp: 10.06.2022.
  18. Gałązka-Sobotka M., Samselska D. 2020. Sytuacja osób dorosłych chorujących na atopowe zapalenie skóry w Polsce, AMICUS Fundacja Łuszczycy i ŁZS. https://zrozumiecazs.pl/storage/app/media/Raport%20AZS.pdf; dostęp: 10.06.2022.
  19. Gothelf, J., Seiden J. 2013. Lean UX. Applying Lean Principles to Improve User Experience, O’Reilly.
  20. Grzelka M. 2020. „Ludzie tacy jak my umrą” – osoby z niepełnosprawnościami, starsze i przewlekle chore a pandemia koronawirusa. https://www.kulawawarszawa.pl/ludzie-tacy-jak-my-umra-osoby-z-niepelnosprawnosciami-starsze-i-przewlekle-chore-a-pandemia-koronawirusa/; dostęp: 10.06.2022.
  21. Hoffmann B. 2002. On the Triad Disease, Illness and Sickness, „The Journal of Medicine and Philosophy: A Forum for Bioethics and Philosophy of Medicine” 27, nr 6, s. 651–673.
  22. Kensing F., Greenbaum J. 2013. Heritage: Having a Say, [w:] Routledge International Handbook of Participatory Design, red. J. Simonsen, T. Robertson, Routledge, s. 21–36.
  23. Kleinman A., Eisenberg L., Good B. 2006 [1978]. Culture, Illness, and Care: Clinical Lessons From Anthropologic and Cross-Cultural Research, „Focus. The Journal of Lifelong Learning in Psychiatry” 4, nr 1, s. 140–149.
  24. Krakus K. 2015. Psychologiczne i społeczne konsekwencje stygmatyzacji na prz y- kładzie osób chorujących przewlekle, „Edukacja Etyczna” 10, s. 57–66.
  25. Langley J., Wolstenholme D., Cooke J. 2018. ‘Collective Making’ as Knowledge Mobilisation: The Contribution of Participatory Design in the Co-Creation of Knowledge in Healthcare, „BMC Health Services Research” 18, s. 1–10.
  26. Lee J. 2015. Participatory Design and “Making” of Health, TedEx Detroit. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HyVaEASftF8, dostęp: 15.06.2022.
  27. Michalak M. 2009. Akceptacja osób przewlekle chorych w społeczeństwie, „Student Niepełnosprawny. Szkice i rozprawy” 9, nr 2, s. 95–112.
  28. Mościchowska I., Rogoś-Turek B. 2015. Badania jako podstawa projektowania user experience, Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
  29. Palmer V.J. 2020. The Participatory Zeitgeist in Health Care: It Is Time for a Science of Participation, „Journal of Participatory Medicine” 12, nr 1, e15101.
  30. Parchomiuk M. 2010. Stygmatyzacja przeniesiona – analiza z jawiska w odniesieniu do rodzin osób niepełnosprawnych i chorych, „Annales Universitatis Mariae Curie-Skłodowska Lublin – Polonia” 23, s. 56–69.
  31. Pilemalm S., Timpka T. 2008. Third Generation Participatory Design in Health Informatics – Making User Participation Applicable to Large-Scale Information System Projects, „Journal of Biomedical Informatics” 41, nr 2, s. 327–339.
  32. Razzouk R., Shute V. 2012. What Is Design Thinking and Why Is It Important?, „Review of Educational Research” 82, nr 3, s. 330–348.
  33. Robertson T., Simonsen J. 2013. Participatory Design: An Introduction, [w:] Routledge International Handbook of Participatory Design, red. J. Simonsen, T. Robertson, Routledge, s. 1–18.
  34. Sanders E.B.N. 2002. From User-Centered to Participatory Design Approaches, [w:] Design and the Social Sciences, red. J. Frascara, Taylor and Francis, s. 1–8.
  35. Shilling V. i in. 2013. Peer Support for Parents of Children with Chronic Disabling Conditions: A Systematic Review of Quantitative and Qualitative Studies, „Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology” 55, nr 7, s. 602–609.
  36. Spinuzzi C. 2005. The Methodolog y of Participatory Design, „Technical Communication” 52, nr 2, s. 163–174.
  37. Sundblad Y. 2011. UTOPIA: Participatory Design from Scandinavia to the World, [w:] History of Nordic Computing 3. HiNC 2010, red. J. Impagliazzo, P. Lundin, B. Wangler, „IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology” 350, Springer, Heidelberg, s. 178–189.
  38. Szczepan-Jakubowska D. 2017. Dynamika grupy: Jak dochodzi do harmonizowania się ludzi w grupach i zespołach? https://epale.ec.europa.eu/pl/blog/dynamika-grupy-jak-dochodzi-do-harmonizowania-sie-ludzi-w-grupach-i-zespolach; dostęp: 15.06.2022.
  39. Tritter J.Q., McCallum A. 2006. The Snakes and Ladders of User Involvement: Moving beyond Arnstein, „Health Policy” 76, nr 2, s. 156–168.
  40. Vandekerckhove P. i in. 2020. Generative Participatory Design Methodology to Develop Electronic Health Interventions: Systematic Literature Review, „Journal of Medical Internet Research” 22, nr 4, e13780. https://www.jmir.org/2020/4/e13780; dostęp: 15.06.2022.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Similar Articles

1 2 3 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.