Knowledge transfer for technology based interventions: Collaboration, development and evaluation

The development of technology based interventions for healthcare requires collaborative working between multidis- ciplinary groups of scientists, engineers, designers, healthcare professionals, and of course end users. This necessitates transfer of knowledge between the various disciplines, preferably underpinned by defined methodologies. Exploitation and uptake of the technology requires participation of industry, typically a small to medium size enterprise (SME) or research department of a larger company and use of the technology requires flexibility of working and often change in healthcare practices. This paper documents the experiences of developing and evaluating two prototypes: the first for telerehabilitation of stroke and the second for self management of long term conditions (stroke, pain and coronary heart failure). We have identified two challenges: (a) knowledge transfer from domain specialists to engineers to facilitate technology development and (b) knowledge transfer back to the domain specialists to facilitate prototype evaluation and exploitation. The use of appropriate ICT tools and the incorporation of principles of human computer interaction have underpinned this approach. Users should influence the choice and functionality of the technology, but decisions must also be informed by technical considerations and possibilities for both hardware and software design. This is a two-way flow of information. How a prototype is taken forward into mainstream practice requires knowledge transfer from academia into the clinical and commercial sectors. Research funding enables both formative and summative prototype evaluation, but does not generally extend to examination of population based effectiveness, which is the evidence most often sought by health commissioners. Hence a process which provides the necessary underpinning for robust evaluation is proposed.

[1]  Andrew Monk,et al.  Improving Your Human-Computer Interface: A Practical Technique , 1993 .

[2]  Alan Cooper,et al.  About Face 3: the essentials of interaction design , 1995 .

[3]  Martin Maguire,et al.  RESPECT: User centred requirements handbook , 1998 .

[4]  David Mant,et al.  Can randomised trials inform clinical decisions about individual patients? , 1999, The Lancet.

[5]  J. Winters Telerehabilitation research: emerging opportunities. , 2002, Annual review of biomedical engineering.

[6]  Richard Smith Improving the management of chronic disease , 2003, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[7]  Joy Adamson,et al.  Is stroke the most common cause of disability? , 2004, Journal of stroke and cerebrovascular diseases : the official journal of National Stroke Association.

[8]  Susan Michie,et al.  Developing and Evaluating Complex Interventions , 2015 .

[9]  Huiru Zheng,et al.  Position-sensing technologies for movement analysis in stroke rehabilitation , 2005, Medical and Biological Engineering and Computing.

[10]  M. Petticrew,et al.  Developing and evaluating complex interventions: the new Medical Research Council guidance , 2008, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[11]  E. Keogh,et al.  Technologically-assisted behaviour change: a systematic review of studies of novel technologies for the management of chronic illness , 2009, Journal of telemedicine and telecare.

[12]  Huiru Zheng,et al.  Promoting Behaviour Change in Long Term Conditions Using a Self-management Platform , 2010 .

[13]  Huiru Zheng,et al.  Smart self management: assistive technology to support people with chronic disease , 2010, Journal of telemedicine and telecare.

[14]  S. Mawson,et al.  The SMART Rehabilitation System for Stroke Self‐management: Issues and Challenges for Evidence‐based Health Technology Research , 2011 .

[15]  Huiru Zheng,et al.  An Ontology-Based Context-aware Approach for Behaviour Analysis , 2011 .