Article Text

Download PDFPDF

Understanding influences on the uptake of pulmonary rehabilitation in the East of England: an Inclusive Design/mixed-methods study protocol
  1. Yuanyuan Liu1,
  2. Terry Dickerson1,
  3. Frances Early2,
  4. Jonathan Fuld2,
  5. P John Clarkson1
  1. 1 Department of Engineering, Cambridge Engineering Design Centre, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
  2. 2 Centre for Self Management Support, Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK
  1. Correspondence to Yuanyuan Liu; yl528{at}cam.ac.uk

Abstract

Introduction 1.2 million people in the UK have chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) that causes breathlessness, difficulty with daily activities, infections and hospitalisation. Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR), a programme of supervised exercise and education, is recommended for patients with COPD. However, only 1 in 10 of those who need it receive PR. Also, the UK National COPD Audit Programme concluded that the COPD treatment might not be accessible to people with disabilities. This paper applies an Inclusive Design approach to community-based PR service provisions. It aims to inform improvements to the 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 and analysis The protocol includes four steps. Step 1 will involve interviews with healthcare professionals and patients to gather insight into their experiences and produce a hierarchical task analysis of the COPD care journeys. Step 2 will estimate the service exclusion: the demand of every task on patients’ capabilities will be rated by predefined scales, and the proportion of the population excluded from the service will be estimated by an exclusion calculator. Step 3 will identify the challenges of the PR service; a framework analysis will guide the data analysis of the interviews and care journey. Step 4 will propose recommendations to help patients manage their COPD care informed by the challenges identified in step 3 and refine recommendations through interviews and focus groups.

Ethics and dissemination The Cambridge Central Research Ethics Committee gave the study protocol a positive ethical opinion (17/EE/0136). Study results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals, conferences and the British Lung Foundation networks. They will also be fed into a Research for Patient Benefit project on increasing the referral and uptake of PR.

  • pulmonary rehabilitation
  • inclusive design
  • patient-centred design
  • care journey
  • patients’ capability
  • COPD

This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Footnotes

  • Contributors YL initiated the protocol. TLD and PJC provided supervision for the research and reviewed as well as finalised the protocol. FE drafted the background, ethics and dissemination and reviewed the protocol. JF was involved in the design of the protocol, clinical guidance for delivery of the study and revision of the manuscript.

  • Funding The research is part funded by the NIHR Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research & Care (CLAHRC) East of England and Buchanan Fund of Downing College. The China Scholarship Council provided funding for the researcher’s PhD study.

  • Disclaimer The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, NIHR or Department of Health and Social Care.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Patient consent Not required.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; peer reviewed by the Research Advisory Committee (RAC) of Cambridge University Hospitals.

  • Data sharing statement The Inclusive Design methods and tools are available from our website: http://www.inclusivedesigntoolkit.com