Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

A hybrid method of healthcare delivery research and human-centered design to develop technology-enabled support for caregivers of hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Supportive Care in Cancer Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Health information technology (HIT) is a widely recognized strategy to encourage cancer patients and caregivers to participate in healthcare delivery in a sustainable and cost-effective way. In the context of autologous hematopoietic cell transplant (HSCT), HIT-enabled tools have the potential to effectively engage, educate, support, and optimize outcomes of patients and caregivers in the outpatient setting. This study sought to leverage human-centered design to develop a high-fidelity prototype of a HIT-enabled psychoeducational tool for HSCT caregivers. Phase 1 focuses on breadth and depth of information gathering through a systematic review and semi-structured interviews to determine optimal tool use. Phase 2 engages in human-centered design synthesis and visualization methods to identify key opportunities for the HIT design. Phase 3 employs human-centered design evaluation, engaging caregivers to respond to low-fidelity concepts and scenarios to help co-design an optimal tool for HSCT. This study outlines a hybrid method of healthcare delivery research and human-centered design to develop technology-enabled support for HSCT caregivers. Herein, we present a design methodology for developing a prototype of HIT-enabled psychoeducational tool which can be leveraged to develop future eHealth innovations to optimize HSCT.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Data are available upon request from the corresponding author.

Code availability

N/A.

References

  1. Kent EE, Rowland JH, Northouse L et al (2016) Caring for caregivers and patients: research and clinical priorities for informal cancer caregiving. Cancer 122(13):1987–1995. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.29939

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Tarver WL, Menachemi N (2016) The impact of health information technology on cancer care across the continuum: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Med Inform Assoc 23(2):420–427. https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocv064

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Weaver SJ, Jacobsen PB (2018) Cancer care coordination: opportunities for healthcare delivery research. Transl Behav Med 8(3):503–508. https://doi.org/10.1093/tbm/ibx079

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Grimm PM, Zawacki KL, Mock V, Krumm S, Frink BB (2000) Caregiver responses and needs. An ambulatory bone marrow transplant model. Cancer Pract 8(3):120–128

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Maher M, Kaziunas E, Ackerman M et al (2016) User-centered design groups to engage patients and caregivers with a personalized health information technology tool. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant 22(2):349–358. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbmt.2015.08.032

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Maher M, Hanauer DA, Kaziunas E et al (2015) A novel health information technology communication system to increase caregiver activation in the context of hospital-based pediatric hematopoietic cell transplantation: a pilot study. JMIR Res Protoc 4(4). https://doi.org/10.2196/resprot.4918

  7. Compton-Phillips A, Mohta NS. Care redesign survey: how design thinking can transform health care. NEJM Catal. Published online June 7, 2018. Accessed 15 December 2020. https://catalyst.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/CAT.18.0159

  8. Hall AE, Bryant J, Sanson-Fisher RW, Fradgley EA, Proietto AM, Roos I (2018) Consumer input into health care: time for a new active and comprehensive model of consumer involvement. Health Expect 21(4):707–713. https://doi.org/10.1111/hex.12665

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Altman M, Huang TTK, Breland JY (2018) Design thinking in health care. Prev Chronic Dis 15:180128. https://doi.org/10.5888/pcd15.180128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Bangerter LR, Griffin JM, Langer S et al (2018) The effect of psychosocial interventions on outcomes for caregivers of hematopoietic cell transplant patients. Curr Hematol Malig Rep 13(3):155–163. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11899-018-0445-y

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Holland JC, Reznik I (2005) Pathways for psychosocial care of cancer survivors. Cancer 104(S11):2624–2637. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.21252

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. National Comprehensive Cancer Network (2003) Distress treatment guidelines for patients. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 1(3):344–374. https://doi.org/10.6004/jnccn.2003.0031

  13. Trebble TM, Hansi N, Hydes T, Smith MA, Baker M (2010) Process mapping the patient journey: an introduction. BMJ 341:c4078. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.c4078

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Philpot LM, Khokhar BA, DeZutter MA et al (2019) Creation of a patient-centered journey map to improve the patient experience: a mixed methods approach. Mayo Clin Proc Innov Qual Outcomes 3(4):466–475. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mayocpiqo.2019.07.004

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Cornet VP, Toscos T, Bolchini D et al (2020) Untold stories in user-centered design of mobile health: practical challenges and strategies learned from the design and evaluation of an app for older adults with heart failure. JMIR MHealth UHealth 8(7). https://doi.org/10.2196/17703

  16. Lucero A (2015) Using affinity diagrams to evaluate interactive prototypes. In: Abascal J, Barbosa S, Fetter M, Gross T, Palanque P, Winckler M (eds) Human-Computer Interaction – INTERACT 2015. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer International Publishing 231–248. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-22668-2_19

  17. Holtzblatt K, Beyer H (1997) Contextual design: defining customer-centered systems. Elsevier

  18. Harboe G, Huang EM (2015) Real-world affinity diagramming practices: bridging the paper-digital gap. In: Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI ’15. ACM Press; 95–104. https://doi.org/10.1145/2702123.2702561

Download references

Funding

This study was supported by The Eagles Fifth District Cancer Telethon pilot grant.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. UnitedHealth Group Research and Development, Minnetonka, MN, USA

    Lauren R. Bangerter

  2. Mayo Clinic Robert D. and Patricia E Kern Center for the Science of Healthcare Delivery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA

    Monica Looze, Barbara Barry, Joan Griffin, Meredith Dezutter, Karen Schaepe & Kristin Fischer

  3. Center for Design in Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA

    Kathleen Harder

  4. Division of Hematology, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Scottsdale, AZ, USA

    Nandita Khera

  5. Division of Hematology, Mayo Clinic Florida, Jacksonville, FL, USA

    Sikander Ailawadhi

Authors
  1. Lauren R. Bangerter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Monica Looze
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Barbara Barry
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Kathleen Harder
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Joan Griffin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Meredith Dezutter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Nandita Khera
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Sikander Ailawadhi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Karen Schaepe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Kristin Fischer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the study conception and design.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lauren R. Bangerter.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval

This study was performed in accordance with the ethical standards of the Institutional Research Board of Mayo Clinic.

Consent to participate

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Consent to publish

The authors affirm that human research participants provided informed consent for publication.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bangerter, L.R., Looze, M., Barry, B. et al. A hybrid method of healthcare delivery research and human-centered design to develop technology-enabled support for caregivers of hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients. Support Care Cancer 30, 227–235 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-021-06347-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-021-06347-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation