Co-design process evaluation for the dissemination of evidence-based research findings with mental health providers and patients in the veterans health administration

Background Co-design is increasingly used for partner engagement in research but rarely employed at the dissemination stage of research and seldom evaluated. In the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), co-design was used to collaborate with end-users to help disseminate research findings related to the evidence-based collaborative chronic care model (CCM) in mental health settings. This work objective is to describe and evaluate the co-design process used to translate and package CCM research findings for active dissemination with end-users. Methods The mixed-method project is aligned with the second phase of the Designing for Dissemination and Sustainability model. Across 4 VA sites, 2 groups of end-users (staff and providers, patients) engaged in 3 site-specific 60-minute co-design sessions and took an anonymous feedback survey developed specifically for this project where they rated co-design principles on a Likert scale from 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree. They created products that translate CCM research findings in end-users’ preferred language and formats for dissemination with peers. Results Thirteen VA mental health administrative and clinical staff and 9 patients participated in 18 co-design sessions across 4 sites. Participants agreed that all 4 key principles of co-design (joint ownership, participant agency, respect and value for all perspectives, mutual benefit) were upheld with means ≥ 4.20 (range 1–5). Meta-inferences provided interpretation and decision for each co-design session activity to create products for increased use of CCM evidence. Staff and providers were satisfied with their co-designed products called the BHIP-CCM Dissemination Resource (mean 4.82; SD 0.39; range 4–5), the marketing messaging (mean 4.55; SD 0.78; range 3–5), and site-specific dissemination plans (mean 4.64; SD 0.77; range 3–5). Patients were very satisfied with their co-designed products: two infographics for TV/monitor display in virtual and in-person waiting rooms (mean 5.00; SD 0.00), and their marketing messaging (mean 4.67; SD 0.47; range 4–5). Conclusions Co-design was useful and rewarding for engaged participants. Co-design can be instrumental in dissemination to increase use of CCM evidence, improve CCM care delivery in mental health, and build community support for CCM implementation and sustainability. These results speak to the capacity of co-design to support other dissemination efforts.