Poster Presentation International Association of the Diabetes and Pregnancy Study Groups 2022 - Hosted by ADIPS

Insights from co-designing a dietary intervention to prevent gestational diabetes: woman-centred care and implications for clinicians (#119)

Nina Meloncelli 1 2 , Samantha Gallaher 3 , Alita Rushton 4 , Shelley Wilkinson 5 , Hannah O'Connor 6 7 , Lauren Kearney 8 , Susan de Jersey 1 6
  1. Perinatal Research Centre, Centre for Clinical Research, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
  2. Allied Health, Metro North Health, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
  3. Consumer Representative, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
  4. Allied Health, Metro North Health, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
  5. School of Human Movement and Nutrition Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
  6. Nutrition and Dietetics, Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Metro North Health, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
  7. Centre for Health Services Research, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
  8. School of Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia

Background

Co-designing research with consumers is critical to the translational impact and applicability/acceptability of interventions and research findings. Co-designing lifestyle interventions with consumers provides researchers with rich information regarding consumers’ views, priorities, and behavioural drivers. We undertook a co-design project to develop a dietary intervention for preventing gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) with women who had a lived experience of GDM. The aim of this study was to report on the experiences, perspectives and needs of co-design participants, in the context of the proposed dietary intervention.

Methods

Queensland mothers with a history of GDM were recruited via social media community groups to participate in 3 x 2-hour online co-design workshops with the research team. The workshops explored women’s previous experiences of GDM management, perceptions of the dietary intervention, intervention delivery, and preferences for behaviour change support to produce positive diet changes.

Results

Eleven women and seven researchers participated in the co-design workshops including a consumer co-lead and external researcher who co-facilitate the workshops. In workshop 1, women shared positive and negative aspects of having GDM, often a driver for their participation in the co-design process. Women who had experienced difficult GDM management or reported a lack of shared autonomy over care were more likely to choose alternative care pathways for subsequent pregnancies. All women believed that preventing GDM was important, expressing initial interest in the proposed dietary intervention and the potential positive effects for mothers and families. Workshop 2 uncovered advantages and disadvantages of different education approaches where individualisation and choice of delivery mode was a strong theme. Specific behavioural influencers involving capability (knowledge/skills), opportunity (time/social norms), and motivation (messaging incorporating long-term and family benefits) that would either help or hinder achieving the intervention’s target behaviours were also uncovered during this workshop. This enabled the researchers to prioritise behaviour change techniques for the intervention. The final workshop was designed to allow the entire co-design team to vote on the best intervention approaches.

Conclusion

Co-design is a powerful tool to ensure interventions are designed in an emancipatory and collaborative manner to produce research that is meaningful to end-users. Women’s previous experiences of GDM were diverse but played an important role in their choices around future antenatal care. This co-design process provided unique insights into what women want/need from interventions with individualisation and flexibility being perceived as key factors for success.