Background: Widespread application of co-design methods in cancer research has highlighted its value for creating user-centric change to cancer care and service delivery models. Use of co-design has also revealed that whilst presenting opportunities for person-centric practice and enhanced services, the process is also fraught with a range of challenges for members, facilitators and service providers.
Aim: As we approach the end of a four-year program of cancer service research (the CanEngage Project) to improve safety outcomes in cancer care among culturally and linguistically diverse communities, we will explore the learnings and practical suggestions that have resulted from the project for co-design in cancer service research with CALD communities.
Methods: We employed an adapted model of experience-based co-design in which consumer co-facilitators and multilingual fieldworkers supported participation and processes. Throughout the four-year project, we gathered process analysis data via interviews with co-design members and facilitators to evaluate this adapted model.
Results: CanEngage has provided evidence and informal learning about the planning and practice of co-design with CALD communities and clinicians in cancer services, which will be reported through this session. Key learnings relate to the impacts of establishing and sustaining the CanEngage Network of 11 consumers and multilingual fieldworkers. With the CanEngage Network, we have collaboratively designed and delivered three series of co-design workshops with six cancer services in NSW and VIC. We have learnt that each co-design is different, with practice driven by group purpose and membership. Fostering close connection between those facilitating co-design was vital to navigate practice together. A co-facilitation model between clinician-academics and consumers underpinned the planning and conduct of co-design. Co-facilitation has enabled us to support diverse members to co-create service relevant tools and practices that support safer care. Co-facilitation itself requires reflective practice, with regular open discussion to plan and debrief about co-design practice being valuable to safely evaluate new approaches.