Advertisement

A Multi-disciplinary Approach in the Development of a Stroke Rehabilitation Tool

  • Marie Sjölinder
  • Maria Ehn
  • Inga-Lill Boman
  • Mia Folke
  • Pär Hansson
  • Disa Sommerfeld
  • Stina Nylander
  • Jörgen Borg
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8512)

Abstract

This work describes a method used in the development of a stroke rehabilitation tool. The method was based on three key elements. The first key element was iterations between the use of broad groups with different professionals/stakeholders and small hands-on working groups with users from the same profession. The second key element was movement between understanding differences between different organizations and professionals and understanding of specific needs within the different organizations. The final key element was including implementation aspects from the very start of the work.

Keywords

Design methods participatory design multi-disciplinary approach 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Hägglund, Stroke Patients’ Needs for Access to Care Process Related Information (2012)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Schuler, D., Namioka, A.: Participatory design: principles and practices. L Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale (1993)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Scandurra, I., Hägglund, M., Koch, S.: From user needs to system specifications: Multi-disciplinary thematic seminars as a collaborative design method for development of health information systems. Journal of Biomedical Informatics 41, 557–569 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Luck, R.: Using artefacts to mediate understanding in design conversations Building Research & Information 35(1), Special Issue: Visual Practices: Images of Knowledge Work, 28–41 (2007)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    van Gemert-Pijnen, J.E., Nijland, N., van Limburg, M., Ossebaard, H.C., Kelders, S.M., Eysenbach, G., Seydel, E.R.: A Holistic Framework to Improve the Uptake and Impact of eHealth Technologies. J. Med. Internet Res. 13(4) (2011)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fleuren, M., Wiefferink, K., Paulussen, T.: Determinants of innovation within health care organizations - Literature review and Delphi study. International Journal for Quality in Health Care 16(2), 107–123 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bjerknes, G., Bratteteig, T.: The memoirs of two survivors - or evaluation of a computer system for cooperative work. In: Proceedings for the Second Comference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, Portland, Oregon, September 26-28. ACM (1988)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mörtberg, C., Bratteteig, T., Wagner, I., Stuedahl, D., Morrison, A.: Methods that Matter in Digital Design Research. In: Exploring Digital Design: Multi-disciplinary Design Practices, pp. 105–144. Springer (2010)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Shneiderman, B.: Designing the User Interface. Addison Wesley (1997)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Friedman, B. (ed.): Human Values and the Design of Computer Technology. Center for the Study of Language and Information (2004)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marie Sjölinder
    • 1
  • Maria Ehn
    • 2
  • Inga-Lill Boman
    • 3
  • Mia Folke
    • 2
  • Pär Hansson
    • 1
  • Disa Sommerfeld
    • 4
  • Stina Nylander
    • 1
  • Jörgen Borg
    • 3
  1. 1.SICS Swedish ICTKistaSweden
  2. 2.Robotdalen/Mälardalens HögskolaVästeråsSweden
  3. 3.Department of Clinical Sciences, Karolinska Institute and Department of Rehabilitation MedicineDanderyd HospitalStockholmSweden
  4. 4.Department of geriatric medicine/Danderyd Hospital, Karolinska InstitutetKarolinska University HospitalDanderydSweden

Personalised recommendations