Abstract
BACKGROUND: School-partnered interventions may improve health outcomes for children with type 1 diabetes, though there is limited evidence to support their effectiveness and sustainability. Family, school, or health system factors may interfere with intervention usability and implementation. OBJECTIVE: To identify and address potential implementation barriers during intervention development, we combined methods in user-centered design and implementation science to adapt an evidence-based psychosocial intervention, the collaborative care model, to a virtual school-partnered collaborative care (SPACE) model for type 1 diabetes between schools and diabetes medical teams. METHODS: We recruited patient, family, school, and health system partners (n=20) to cocreate SPACE through iterative, web-based design sessions using a digital whiteboard (phase 1). User-centered design methods included independent and group activities for idea generation, visual voting, and structured critique of the evolving SPACE prototype. In phase 2, the prototype was evaluated with the usability evaluation for evidence-based psychosocial interventions methods. School nurses reviewed the prototype and tasks in cognitive walkthroughs and completed the Intervention Usability Scale (IUS). Two members of the research team independently identified and prioritized (1-3 rating) discrete usability concerns. We evaluated the relationship between prioritization and the percentage of nurses reporting each usability issue with Spearman correlation. Differences in IUS scores by school nurse characteristics were assessed with ANOVA. RESULTS: In the design phase, the partners generated over 90 unique ideas for SPACE, prioritizing elements pertaining to intervention adaptability, team-based communication, and multidimensional outcome tracking. Following three iterations of prototype development, cognitive walkthroughs were completed with 10 school nurses (n=10, 100% female; mean age 48.5, SD 9.5 years) representing different districts and years of experience. Nurses identified 16 discrete usability issues (each reported by 10%-60% of participants). Two issues receiving the highest priority (3.0): ability to access a virtual platform (n=3, 30% of participants) and data-sharing mechanisms between nurses and providers (n=6, 60% of participants). There was a moderate correlation between priority rating and the percentage of nurses reporting each issue (ρ=0.63; P=.01). Average IUS ratings (77.8, SD 11.1; 100-point scale) indicated appropriate usability. There was no difference in IUS ratings by school nurse experience (P=.54), student caseload (P=.12), number of schools covered (P=.90), or prior experience with type 1 diabetes (P=.83), suggesting that other factors may influence usability. The design team recommended strategies for SPACE implementation to overcome high-priority issues, including training users on videoconferencing applications, establishing secure forms for school data reporting, and sharing glucose data in real-time during SPACE meetings. CONCLUSIONS: Cross-sector interventions are complex, and perceived usability is a potential barrier to implementation. Using web-based cocreation methods with community partners promoted high-quality intervention design that is aligned with end-user priorities. Quantitative and qualitative assessments indicated appropriate degree of usability to move forward with pilot-testing.