Stefan Elbers

126 Chapter 5 sessions with the core team, the students worked towards a final rudimentary prototype. One student focused on the transfer of important treatment insights to each patients’ personal context. She developed a toolbox that contained various methods to capture and store therapy insights in order to facilitate retrieval in a relevant personal context (e.g., using a personal picture as memory cue for an important moment during treatment). The other 2 students focused on the generation of valued-based goals and the formulation of action plans for each consecutive step towards the goal. Their final rudimentary prototype consisted of a mockup mobile app, allowing participants to browse through all steps that were required to formulate and plan a valued-based goal. In Appendix 1, pages 12-13 show the final versions of these rudimentary prototypes. Reflection. This phase was characterized by a shift from “what” to “how” to design. Accordingly, presentation form, usability, and implementation into existing treatment practice became increasingly relevant. To engage stakeholders, the students visited the treatment centers on multiple occasions. In contrast to other phases, the patients and HCPs could provide feedback on ideas, but were not involved in the decision-making process regarding the final design of the rudimentary prototype, which potentially influenced their commitment. Moreover, their reduced involvement in this phase resulted in limited information regarding the applicability of the rudimentary prototypes in clinical practice. Phase 4: “Deliver” Description. In the final phase, the core team merged both rudimentary prototypes into one final prototype intervention over a period of 2 months. To do so, the core team organized a final co-creation session, where the students presented their concepts. The aim of this session was to receive final feedback on the potential value and function of both rudimentary prototypes and to formulate a recommendation to the steering committee with respect to the final prototype design. To facilitate this process, stakeholders (n=14) were instructed to reflect on the concepts by taking various patient perspectives into account. For this purpose, 4 personas were created with variation on 2 characteristics that were often discussed during previous patient interviews. Each persona had either a high or low level of social support and a high or low tendency to protect personal boundaries. In Appendix 1, page 14 depicts the discussions between stakeholders as well as the poster that explained the 4 personas. The final conclusion was that both rudimentary prototypes had potential as supportive treatment modalities to prevent relapse after successful treatment. Furthermore, future testing and development should primarily focus on optimizing the active treatment components and calibrating the intervention to the treatment program. Based on this advice, the steering committee decided tomerge both rudimentary prototypes into 1 prototype workbook. The core team composed a list of individual intervention