Co-producing shared wound care education: experiences of service users and healthcare professionals.

doi:10.1080/17482631.2026.2637799

In brief

This study details how service users and HCPs collaborated to create wound care education materials, emphasizing clear leaflet-style information on infection, dressing changes, and healing. Co-production ensured relevance for community practice.

What this article is about

Quick Answer

This study details how service users and HCPs collaborated to create wound care education materials, emphasizing clear leaflet-style information on infection, dressing changes, and healing. Co-production ensured relevance for community practice.

Student takeaways

Key Takeaways

Both service users and HCPs prioritized clear information about wound infection.
Service users and HCPs preferred leaflet format for educational resources on shared wound care.
Co-designing the resource ensured it was clinically relevant, reflecting real-world experiences of patients and clinicians.
The co-produced resource enhanced accessibility and applicability in community practice settings.
Involving service users with lived experience directly improved the relevance of the developed educational materials.

Student summary

Why This Research Matters

This article, titled 'Co-producing shared wound care education: experiences of service users and healthcare professionals,' explores a vital aspect of modern nursing practice. The core focus of the research is on developing educational resources that genuinely support shared wound care—a collaborative approach where patients actively participate in their own healing process alongside healthcare professionals (HCPs). This model aims to improve outcomes by enhancing patient autonomy, making them more informed and engaged partners in managing their wounds.

The study was conducted using a mixed-methods design. Initially, an online survey gathered broad input from both service users (individuals with personal experience of wound care) and HCPs (such as nurses). This quantitative phase helped identify common themes and preferences regarding the type of information needed for shared wound care education. Following this, qualitative methods were employed: focus groups allowed participants to discuss these needs in more depth, while semi-structured interviews provided individual perspectives on experiences, specific needs related to wound management tasks like dressing changes, understanding infection signs, and learning about normal healing processes. The data collected from these various sources was then analyzed using semantic thematic analysis, a method that identifies patterns of meaning across the dataset.

For nursing students, this research highlights several important considerations. Firstly, it underscores the importance of patient-centered care; effective education isn't just about imparting information but ensuring it's relevant and accessible to patients in their own context. Secondly, it demonstrates how involving service users directly in the development process (co-production) can lead to more practical and usable resources. This is a key principle for creating evidence-based nursing practices that are grounded in real-world experiences.

When appraising this study from a student's perspective, several aspects should be considered. The methodology appears robust, combining both quantitative surveys with qualitative depth through focus groups and interviews. However, the abstract does not provide specific details about sample sizes or demographic characteristics of the participants (e.g., how many service users vs. HCPs were involved). It also doesn't detail any formal measures used to assess the impact or effectiveness of the co-produced educational resource itself beyond its perceived relevance and accessibility.

Regarding source rights, it's important to note that while the paper is indexed in PubMed with a DOI (10.1080/17482631.2026.2637799), full-text access details are not provided here. Students should verify if this article is available through their institution's library subscriptions or open-access platforms before attempting to read the entire paper.

A nurse would reason from this evidence by recognizing that simply providing information isn't enough for shared wound care. The findings suggest that a collaborative approach, where patients and HCPs work together on developing educational materials (like leaflets), leads to resources that are more likely to be understood, used, and valued by service users. This directly supports the principles of person-centered care and self-management in community healthcare settings.

The study emphasizes that co-producing these resources ensures they reflect real-world experiences from both patients and clinicians. For instance, if a leaflet on wound dressing changes is created with input from those who actually perform or receive this care, it's more likely to address practical concerns and be presented in an understandable way. This collaborative development process enhances the resource's accessibility (e.g., language used) and applicability (e.g., content relevance). Ultimately, such resources can support continued engagement of service users in their own wound management tasks, fostering a sense of ownership and empowerment.

In summary, this research provides valuable insights into how educational materials for shared wound care should be developed. It moves beyond traditional top-down approaches to involve those most affected by the information—the patients themselves—alongside healthcare professionals. This co-production model not only makes resources more effective but also aligns with broader trends in nursing towards greater patient involvement and personalized care.

Source abstract

Study Overview

Shared wound care promotes collaboration between patients and healthcare professionals (HCPs) to improve wound management outcomes and enhance patient autonomy. Educational resources to support shared wound care are typically developed without the direct involvement of service users or HCPs, limiting their relevance, accessibility, and impact in community practice. This study aimed to co-produce an educational resource to support shared wound care in community settings by integrating the perspectives of both service users and HCPs. A four-phase explanatory sequential mixed-methods design was employed involving an online survey, focus groups and semi-structured interviews to explore the experiences, needs and preferences of HCPs and service users. Semantic thematic analysis was used to analyse the data. Both groups prioritised clear information in a leaflet format about wound infection, wound dressing changes and the normal wound healing process to facilitate involvement in shared care tasks. Co-designing the educational resource ensured it was both clinically and contextually relevant, reflecting the real-world experiences of patients and clinicians. Co-producing educational resources enhances their accessibility and applicability and supports continued engagement from service users in their own care, providing a model for collaborative resource development that aligns with person-centred and self-management principles in community healthcare. Service users with lived experience were involved in the conduct of this study.

Study type: Journal Article

Evidence appraisal

Main Findings

Both service users and HCPs prioritized clear information about wound infection.
Service users and HCPs preferred leaflet format for educational resources on shared wound care.
Co-designing the resource ensured it was clinically relevant, reflecting real-world experiences of patients and clinicians.
The co-produced resource enhanced accessibility and applicability in community practice settings.
Involving service users with lived experience directly improved the relevance of the developed educational materials.

Practice transfer

Clinical Relevance

Educational resources for wound care should be co-developed with input from both patients/service users and healthcare professionals to ensure high relevance and usability.
A leaflet format is preferred by this group for delivering key information on shared wound care tasks like dressing changes, infection signs, and healing processes.
Co-production of educational materials can enhance patient engagement in their own care management, supporting self-management principles.
This model offers a practical template for creating person-centered resources that align with community healthcare needs.
Involving service users directly in the development process leads to more contextually appropriate and accessible wound care education.

Faculty notes

Educational Relevance

This study, 'Co-producing shared wound care education: experiences of service users and healthcare professionals,' investigates a critical aspect of contemporary community nursing practice by focusing on the collaborative development of educational materials. The research is grounded in the understanding that effective wound management often requires active participation from patients themselves. The primary aim was to co-produce an educational resource designed for shared wound care, ensuring it met the needs identified through direct input from both service users (patients) and healthcare professionals (HCPs).

The methodology employed a four-phase explanatory sequential mixed-methods design. This began with an online survey targeting HCPs and service users to gather initial data on their experiences, perceived needs, and preferences regarding wound care education. Subsequently, focus groups were conducted to delve deeper into these themes, allowing for richer qualitative insights through group discussions. Finally, semi-structured interviews provided individual perspectives, capturing nuanced personal accounts of what constitutes effective shared wound care information.

The analysis of this diverse data set utilized semantic thematic analysis, a rigorous approach that identifies patterns and overarching meanings within the collected narratives and responses. This method is well-suited for understanding complex human experiences related to healthcare education.

Key findings from the study indicate that both service users and HCPs prioritized clear, concise information presented in an accessible format—specifically a leaflet style. The content of this preferred resource centered on three core areas: wound infection (including signs and prevention), the process of changing dressings, and understanding the normal stages of wound healing. These topics were deemed essential for facilitating patient involvement in shared care tasks.

The co-design approach was pivotal to the study's success. By integrating perspectives from both service users with lived experience and HCPs with clinical expertise during the resource development phase, the resulting educational material became clinically relevant (accurate and up-to-date) and contextually appropriate (tailored to real-world community practice settings). This collaborative effort ensured that the final product resonated with its intended audience.

The implications of this research are significant for nursing education and clinical practice. It provides a robust model for developing educational resources that aligns with person-centered care principles, emphasizing patient autonomy and self-management skills in wound care. The study demonstrates how co-production can enhance resource accessibility (e.g., using plain language) and applicability (e.g., focusing on practical tasks), thereby fostering greater engagement from service users in their own health management.

For nursing faculty, this paper offers valuable insights into innovative pedagogical approaches for teaching about patient education. It underscores the importance of involving students in understanding participatory research methods like co-production and highlights how such methodologies can lead to more effective learning outcomes when preparing future nurses for community-based care. The study also serves as a practical example of how qualitative research, particularly mixed-methods designs, can address complex issues in nursing practice.

While the abstract provides strong evidence for these findings, faculty should encourage students to critically evaluate aspects not detailed here, such as potential biases inherent in co-production processes or the generalizability of results from this specific study context. The absence of reported citation counts might also warrant discussion regarding current impact versus foundational contribution.

Critical appraisal

Limitations

The abstract does not provide specific details about sample sizes or demographic characteristics of participants (service users vs. HCPs).
No information is given on how the effectiveness, impact, or long-term usability of the co-produced educational resource was formally measured.
The study's findings are based solely on an explanatory sequential mixed-methods design; other research designs might offer different insights.

Classroom use

Discussion Questions

How can nursing education programs better integrate principles of co-production and patient involvement in curriculum development?
What specific challenges or ethical considerations arise when service users with lived experience are involved as active participants in the conduct of a study like this one?
In what ways could the findings from this study be adapted for use in other areas of community health education beyond wound care?
How might healthcare organizations overcome potential barriers to implementing co-produced educational resources on a wider scale?
What further research is needed to evaluate the long-term impact and effectiveness of such co-produced resources in improving patient outcomes?
Discussion question 6: What does "Co-producing shared wound care education: experiences of service users and healthcare professionals." help nursing students evaluate?
Discussion question 7: What does "Co-producing shared wound care education: experiences of service users and healthcare professionals." help nursing students evaluate?
Discussion question 8: What does "Co-producing shared wound care education: experiences of service users and healthcare professionals." help nursing students evaluate?
Discussion question 9: What does "Co-producing shared wound care education: experiences of service users and healthcare professionals." help nursing students evaluate?
Discussion question 10: What does "Co-producing shared wound care education: experiences of service users and healthcare professionals." help nursing students evaluate?

Study cards

Flashcards

What was the primary aim of this study?

The primary aim of this study was to co-produce an educational resource to support shared wound care in community settings by integrating the perspectives of both service users and healthcare professionals.

Which methodological design did the researchers employ for their study?

A four-phase explanatory sequential mixed-methods design involving an online survey, focus groups, and semi-structured interviews was employed.

What were the main topics prioritized by both service users and HCPs in terms of educational content?

Both groups prioritised clear information about wound infection, wound dressing changes, and the normal wound healing process.

In what format did participants prefer to receive this educational information?

Participants preferred to receive the educational information in a leaflet format.

What was one of the key benefits of co-designing the educational resource mentioned in the abstract?

Co-designing the educational resource ensured it was both clinically and contextually relevant, reflecting real-world experiences.

How did co-producing educational resources enhance their impact according to the study's findings?

Co-producing educational resources enhanced their accessibility and applicability.

What positive outcome for service users is mentioned regarding continued engagement in their own care?

Co-producing educational resources supports continued engagement from service users in their own care.

Which principles does this co-production model align with, as stated in the abstract?

The co-production model aligns with person-centred and self-management principles in community healthcare.

Who was involved in the conduct of this study according to the source metadata?

Service users with lived experience were involved in the conduct of this study.

What is one potential limitation noted regarding the rights status of the supplementary context information?

One potential limitation noted is that 'Rights/access metadata is incomplete and should be verified before reuse or monetization decisions.'