Background: Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) is recommended for patients with COPD to improve their symptoms and quality of life. However, in the UK, only one in ten of those who need PR receive it and this might be inaccessible to people with disabilities. This study aims to inform improvements to PR service by identifying barriers to the uptake of PR in the COPD care journey in relation to patients’ capabilities that can affect their access to PR. Methods: An Inclusive Design approach with mixed methods was undertaken. Firstly, patients and healthcare professionals were interviewed to gather insight into their experiences of COPD care and map patients’ care journey. Secondly, an Exclusion Calculator was used to estimate service demand on patients’ capability and the proportion of population excluded from the service. Thirdly, a framework analysis was applied to guide data analysis to identify the challenges of accessing PR. Finally, proposed recommendations were refined with patients and healthcare professionals. Results: The overall capability-related exclusion number was very high (62.5%), and exclusion caused by limited mobility was the highest (50%) among the interviewees and even higher based on the population database. This suggests the importance of considering COPD patients’ capability-related needs to improve their access to care. Capability-related challenges for patients accessing PR such as poor mobility to transport and low vision impairing ability to read inhaler instructions were identified, as well as non-capability-related challenges such as patients’ perception about COPD and inability to access proper information. Recommendations were proposed to help patients to self-manage their COPD and access to PR. Conclusion: Lack of attention to COPD patients’ capability level in the delivery of PR may affect its uptake. Considering the capability-related needs of COPD patients and providing patients with reassurance, information, and support on their care journey could improve the uptake of PR.

Objectives To systematically review the evidence base for a systems approach to healthcare design, delivery or improvement. Design Systematic review with meta-analyses. Methods Included were studies in any patients, in any healthcare setting where a systems approach was compared with usual care which reported quantitative results for any outcomes for both groups. We searched Medline, Embase, HMIC, Health Business Elite, Web of Science, Scopus, PsycINFO and CINAHL from inception to 28 May 2019 for relevant studies. These were screened, and data extracted independently and in duplicate. Study outcomes were stratified by study design and whether they reported patient and/or service outcomes. Meta-analysis was conducted with Revman software V.5.3 using ORs - heterogeneity was assessed using I 2 statistics. Results Of 11 405 records 35 studies were included, of which 28 (80%) were before-and-after design only, five were both before-and-after and concurrent design, and two were randomised controlled trials (RCTs). There was heterogeneity of interventions and wide variation in reported outcome types. Almost all results showed health improvement where systems approaches were used. Study quality varied widely. Exploratory meta-analysis of these suggested favourable effects on both patient outcomes (n=14, OR=0.52 (95% CI 0.38 to 0.71) I 2 =91%), and service outcomes (n=18, OR=0.40 (95% CI 0.31 to 0.52) I 2 =97%). Conclusions This study suggests that a systems approaches to healthcare design and delivery results in a statistically significant improvement to both patient and service outcomes. However, better quality studies, particularly RCTs are needed. PROSPERO registration number CRD42017065920.

Inclusive Design is usually applied to consumer products and services; here we investigate if it can be applied to healthcare delivery services. Methods: A case study approach was used by applying Inclusive Design methods to a telephone 'Physio-Direct' service for patients with back pain. Online surveys and interviews with healthcare professionals were used to gather insight into the delivery of back pain care and to construct a task analysis of the patient care journey. The task analysis was used to estimate the service demand made on patients' capabilities. Finally, an exclusion calculator was used to estimate the proportion of a population excluded from the service. Results: The surveys (n = 30) and interviews (n = 4) showed that communication difficulties, patients' reduced capability, service misconceptions and difficulties in obtaining information were the main barriers, which prevented patients from accessing the service. Some tasks placed a high demand on the patients' capabilities. These included telephone assessment, waiting for a telephone response, memorising the verbal advice, understanding the posted exercise leaflets and doing the exercises. It was estimated that at least 15% of the British population are excluded from the 'Physio-Direct' service. Conclusion: Inclusive Design methods were applied to the 'Physio-Direct' service and demand on its users identified ways in which the service could be improved. This suggests that Inclusive Design may be a useful tool in improving healthcare service delivery.

OBJECTIVE: This study identifies the stakeholders who have a role in medical device purchasing within the wider system of health-care delivery and reports on their particular challenges to promote patient safety during purchasing decisions. METHODS: Data was collected through observational work, participatory workshops, and semi-structured qualitative interviews, which were analyzed and coded. The study takes a systems-based and engineering design approach to the study. Five hospitals took part in this study, and the participants included maintenance, training, clinical end-users, finance, and risk departments. RESULTS: The main stakeholders for purchasing were identified to be staff from clinical engineering (Maintenance), device users (Clinical), device trainers (Training), and clinical governance for analyzing incidents involving devices (Risk). These stakeholders display varied characteristics in terms of interpretation of their own roles, competencies for selecting devices, awareness and use of resources for purchasing devices, and attitudes toward the purchasing process. The role of "clinical engineering" is seen by these stakeholders to be critical in mediating between training, technical, and financial stakeholders but not always recognized in practice. CONCLUSIONS: The findings show that many device purchasing decisions are tackled in isolation, which is not optimal for decisions requiring knowledge that is currently distributed among different people within different departments. The challenges expressed relate to the wider system of care and equipment management, calling for a more systemic view of purchasing for medical devices.

Design and engineering concepts are increasingly welcomed by healthcare communities for developing products and environments. With the recognition of healthcare as a safety-critical industry, design processes can also be used to develop services, organisations, and management systems in healthcare. The case study reported on here forms part of a wider research study of medical device purchasing practice, and provides an example of applying systemic design methods to one healthcare context. Collaboration between the researchers and a hospital provided an opportunity to explore design approaches as part of the research process, in terms of data collection, analysis, synthesis, as well as in the implementation of new practices. The paper firstly gives justification for using design and systems approaches, and specifies the particular aspects of design approaches used, including a discussion on their applicability to the purchasing of medical devices. Design approaches used included diagramming methods, participatory design, and risk analyses techniques, which were used in conjunction with qualitative methods. A description of the techniques used with the collaborating hospital then follows, including some of the methodological challenges encountered. The case study shows a practical example of how design methods and tools can be used to research within a healthcare context, and is deliberately descriptive, as the intended goal is to provide a framework for future design of purchasing systems. Good research practice in this study is therefore also taken to be the first steps in good design practice.

In England, services addressing the complex needs of people with learning disabilities by integrating health and social care are currently designed in an ad hoc fashion. A structured approach has the potential to address variable levels of service provision and quality as well as provide clarity about the purpose and boundaries of the services. A design process is a series of steps taken to develop a product or process from initial needs to final design specifications and implementation. Currently no structured design process for these complex health and care services exists. Based on a literature review and an extensive set of interviews and observations carried out in a learning disability service we suggest a research framework rooted in engineering design to develop an appropriate design process. An existing model for design research forms the basis of an exploratory approach that allows for adaptation to different internal and external factors and constraints.