Principles Of Co-production Research Articles

Bringing data to life: A model for involving lived experience in data-driven research

ObjectiveIt is generally accepted that involving experts by experience is necessary to deliver research that is relevant to community need and to progress the data democratisation agenda. We have piloted and evaluated a model of co-production for data-driven research with seldom heard groups. ApproachIn partnership with the charity Voice of Young People in Care (VOYPIC) and a group of care experienced young people, the Administrative Data Research Centre Northern Ireland (ADRC NI) piloted and implemented a model of co-production in data-driven research. To evaluate the model, interviews were conducted with the young people, staff at VOYPIC, and ADRC NI researchers and public engagement team members. ResultsThematic analysis of interview data identified numerous benefits and barriers to co-producing data-driven research with experts by experience. We offer reflections from three perspectives (the young people, VOYPIC and ADRC NI), as well as a model that can be adapted with different lived experience groups in other data-driven research programmes. Conclusion Experts by experience can be equal partners in most stages of the data research cycle, and there are tangible benefits for all partners and the research itself. However, aligning the aspirational principles of co-production with the realities of delivering data research is challenging and has implications for achieving the democratisation of data. ImplicationsThis session will share real world perspectives on the co-production of data research with seldom heard groups.

From passive participants to proactive partners: How to engage students in the design, delivery and development of research using the principles of co-production.

From passive participants to proactive partners: How to engage students in the design, delivery and development of research using the principles of co-production.

Applying co-production principles in research: reflections from young people and academics.

Co-production, a form of collaborative working, is guided by principles including valuing all participants, building on individual strengths, blurring distinctions between roles, delivering benefits for all participants, building support networks and supporting people to deliver work themselves. This article explores how co-production is understood by young people and researchers and how co-production principles can be applied within a research context. We identify challenges of implementing existing co-production frameworks in research and key areas to consider for future work.

'The Norm Is to Not Openly Collaborate': Using the Lens of Co-Production to Evaluate the Development of a COVID-19 ICU Triage Policy.

In 2020, surging cases of COVID-19 meant that health services had to plan for crisis-level triage. In the Australian Capital Territory, the Clinical Health Emergency Coordination Centre sought to develop a triage policy in collaboration with a range of consumer, carer and community groups. This study aims to map the collaborative development of the COVID-19 ICU triage policy onto the principles of co-production. Interviews were conducted with facilitators, members of advocacy or consumer groups and clinicians who were involved in the development of the triage policy. Interviews were thematically analysed using both theory- and data-driven approaches to, respectively, draw on the theoretical framework of co-production, and to explore participants' perspectives relevant to but beyond the scope of this theoretical framework. The findings suggest that at each stage of the initiative, there were ways in which the principles of co-production were met, and ways in which they were not met. One of the fundamental concerns that arose was about whether trying to solve a problem based on resources was compatible with a solution based on human rights. Literature about co-production has been critiqued for being limited to aspirational concerns, or implying co-production is easily achievable. The current study contributes to existing research through the application of the theoretical framework of co-production and exploring ways its aims were met and not met within a system-level collaboration developing a high-stakes health policy. This study has been conducted and written by researchers working from lived experience perspectives, and other researchers working from traditionally mainstream health disciplines, including psychology and medicine. Further, the study is about patient and public involvement in the development of a health policy. Thus it both embodies and is about non-tokenistic collaboration between people with lived experience and other health professionals.

The operationalisation of recovery colleges: A scoping review.

Recovery Colleges (RCs) represent an approach to enhancing mental wellbeing through education, lived experience and co-production. Despite their increasing presence, scant literature explores the operationalisation of RCs and their embodiment of co-production principles. The aim of this scoping review was to investigate the operationalisation of RCs and their application of co-production in RCs located in high-income countries over the past decade. Employing an established scoping review methodology, searches were conducted across seven academic databases. Ten primary studies met the inclusion criteria. In addition, stakeholders were consulted to validate themes and uncover knowledge gaps. Findings suggest that RCs are inherently idiosyncratic, adapted to suit local contexts. Discussions persist regarding their optimal institutional contexts and positioning and the interpretation of key terms such as 'recovery' and 'co-production', influencing daily operations and stakeholder involvement. Challenges surrounding measuring success against fidelity criteria underscore the need for a broader understanding of RC value and sustainability. This review offers a synopsis of the existing literature offering insights concerning the operationalisation of RCs. Through a synthesis of diverse primary studies, it systematically identifies and describes the operational nuances within the RC landscape and the fundamental elements underpinning RC operations, while shedding light on critical knowledge gaps in both research and practice. SO WHAT?: This review underscores the importance of a broader understanding of RC value and sustainability, offering insights for both research and practice in the field of mental health and wellbeing. This review highlights the significance of further exploration and refinement of RC operationalisation to enhance their effectiveness and impact in supporting mental wellbeing.

Patient-led co-production in community mental health nursing practice: part 2

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to provide an example of patient-led co-production. Design/methodology/approach The New Economics Foundation’s six principles of co-production (nef, 2013) have been used to frame the activities undertaken during the author’s relationship with a community mental health nurse. Findings This paper describes a co-produced project between a patient and a community mental health nurse to create a range of resources and to deliver training, resulting in mutual benefit for both parties. Practical implications This paper invites policy makers to consider the unique role that community mental health nurses can play in supporting patients with long-term challenges that have developed because of an imbalance and an abuse of power within earlier relationships; by adopting a co-production approach, centred on the patient’s interests and skills, a working partnership can be achieved wherein both parties feel that they matter. Originality/value Co-production is usually used with groups of stakeholders working together in an equitable way to design or deliver a new service; this paper, however, seeks to demonstrate how the process can be effectively used when the project is patient-led within the context of a therapeutic relationship.

Quality Improvement Programme on Implementing Co-Production in Care Programme Approach in an In-Patient Rehabilitation Psychiatric Unit to Enhance Patient Engagement and Positive Step-Down Discharges

IntroductionThis quality improvement (QI) programme was proposed to integrate co-production principles into rehabilitation psychiatry, focusing on enhancing patient-centred care and promoting positive step-down discharges within the mental health system. The backdrop of the QI programme was the essential role of rehabilitation psychiatry in aiding the recovery and reintegration of individuals with mental health challenges, and sub-optimal audit results about patient’s attendance and positive step-down discharges at an in-patient psychiatric unit.ObjectivesThe QI programme aimed to implement and explore Co-production, a transformative approach involving patients and healthcare professionals as equal partners.-To promote co-production in psychiatric in-patient service-To improve patient experience in the CPA meetings-To reduce anxiety associated with the CPA meetings and discharge planning-To assess staff’s limitations and barriers in promoting co-production. Methods The QI programme was divided into phases, including diagnostic, problem-solving, and evaluation. It employed diagnostic tools such as the fishbone cause and effect diagram and the 5-Why Technique for root cause analysis. The project’s aim was aligned with the Model of Improvement, guided by the three fundamental questions. Change ideas were developed using driver’s diagram and were then evaluated through PDSA cycles. Quantitative analysis utilized paired t-tests to assess the significance of changes, and qualitative analysis focused on patient perspectives gathered through the co-produced CPA questionnaire. Emerging themes from the questionnaire responses were integrated into the project’s trajectory through narrative synthesis. Predictions were formulated to measure project success: 50% patient attendance in the next CPA meetings, 70% positive step-down discharges, and improved Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A) scores.ResultsThe iterative Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles demonstrated the evolving impact of interventions on patient engagement and discharge outcomes. Implementation of patient information leaflets, staff training, and a CPA agenda template led to increased attendance and positive step-down discharges. Analysis of HAM-A scores revealed a substantial decline in anxiety levels for almost all participants, suggesting the effectiveness of the interventions. Discharge outcomes were influenced by patient engagement and tailored interventions. Patient responses revealed themes such as challenges during transitions to community care, empowerment from shared decision-making, and diverse experiences in communication with healthcare professionals.ConclusionsThe CPA agenda template improved patient experiences by enhancing communication and patient-centeredness.Disclosure of InterestNone Declared

Research Co-production Within Humanitarian Health: Reflections on Our Practice

Research co-production is recognized as important for humanitarian health actors, as part of the growing drive towards localizing and decolonizing aid. Despite recognition that co-production is challenging to implement, reflexive accounts of co-production efforts remain limited. In this paper, we critically examine the role of co-production within a multi-partner research collaboration in Lebanon involving multiple academic, civil society and government-affiliated partners based in the UK and in Lebanon. Through interactive reflection sessions and interviews with research team partners, we document how co-production principles were embedded into our project, explore contextual factors influencing the collaboration, identify successes and challenges to co-production and identify future opportunities for research co-production. We find mixed understandings of co-production between team members and siloed efforts to co-produce within our partnership. We identify key challenges to co-production including contextual factors related to Lebanon and COVID-19, institutional power dynamics, budgets, difficulties in engaging service users and availability of stakeholders to co-produce, while mapping examples of successful co-production in our project. Our study emphasizes the importance of ensuring shared understandings of the scope of co-production at the outset of projects and suggest the collaborative analysis processes provide a key opportunity for researchers to embed co-production principles.

Co-Producing the International Pediatric Oncology Exercise Guidelines (iPOEG) Toolkit with End-Users

The international Pediatric Oncology Exercise Guidelines (iPOEG) support physical activity among children and adolescents affected by cancer. Knowledge translation efforts are needed to ensure that those who will use and/or benefit from the iPOEG have access to it. This mixed-methods study followed co-production principles as guided by an integrated knowledge translation approach within the Knowledge to Action (KTA) Framework, to engage end-users (i.e., professionals and patients/caregivers) to: (1) identify the types of resources needed; (2) co-produce an iPOEG brand; (3) co-produce resources and content; and (4) co-produce dissemination plans to distribute the iPOEG Toolkit (i.e., resources and content). End-users indicated requiring resources such as posters, infographics, social media posts, and videos, and co-created resource content covering quick tips to get active and movement-related education and information. Generated strategies to disseminate the iPOEG Toolkit included: (1) academic presentations; (2) brief education sessions and facilitated discussions to different end-user groups; (3) engaging champions from different end-user groups; (4) emails and email reminders; (5) mainstream news outlets (e.g., newspaper, magazines, or segments on the television [i.e., local news]); and (6) social media. Co-production of the iPOEG Toolkit and dissemination plan were guided by two phases within the KTA framework to build tools that can promote the reach of the iPOEG, ultimately increasing physical activity in this population.

Obstacles to co-producing evaluation knowledge: power, control and voluntary sector dynamics

Background: Despite literature recognising the huge potential of co-production as a positive approach to evidence creation, there is a dearth of evidence about how co-production principles can problematise knowledge exchange, specifically in evaluation work. Aims: To critically examine three evaluation projects commissioned by voluntary sector stakeholders to illustrate challenges in knowledge exchange linked to the co-production of evidence exchange. Methods: We critically compare the challenges experienced in co-producing evidence across three evaluations, reflecting on power dynamics, co-productive ways of working and emotions, which all impact upon successful knowledge exchange. Findings: In Project 1, internal monitoring data required for reporting was not shared. In Project 2, the commissioners’ need to evidence success resulted in limited knowledge sharing, with valuable learning about partnership issues and service delivery held internally. In Project 3, evidence demonstrating the failure of a local authority model of area management for community members was partially discredited by statutory stakeholders (state actors). Discussion and conclusions: Bias in evaluation reporting and academic publication can arise from current knowledge exchange processes, including co-production. Voluntary sector funding is problematic as stakeholders delivering programmes also commission evaluations. Knowledge exchange is influenced by vested interests arising from the political context in which data is gathered. Evaluators can face aggression, challenge and unfair treatment resulting in damaged relationships, and failures in knowledge exchange. The emotional elements of knowledge exchange remain under-reported. Varying and shifting power dynamics also limit knowledge exchange. Changing research practice, to support power sharing, needs further exploration to facilitate improved knowledge exchange.

Integrating Implementation Theory to Address Inequities in Cancer Care: Perspectives from an International Working Group

Background . There are well‐established, persistent inequities in cancer care and cancer outcomes within and between countries. The aim of this article is to explore how implementation theory, specifically the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), alongside coproduction principles, could be used to maximise the effectiveness of innovations with a vision of reducing inequity in cancer care. Methods. Workshops were conducted with partners from US, Australia, and UK, participating in the University Global Partnership Network (UGPN), which funded the collaboration. From these workshops, three case studies were identified and the framework was applied to identify ways of using CFIR to maximise the effectiveness of innovations. Results. The three case studies focused on human papillomavirus (HPV) testing and vaccination, participation in clinical trials, and use of translation services. We identified opportunities, for each of the case studies, where CFIR could be applied to improve implementation and proposed recommendations to ensure effective implementation of innovations using CFIR domains, including individual constructs (e.g., awareness and cultural competence), inner setting constructs (e.g., technology infrastructure), and outer setting constructs (e.g., how services are monitored, evaluated, and commissioned). Conclusions. Applying CFIR as an implementation framework offers a structured and holistic approach to consider how to maximise the effectiveness of innovations in the context of reducing inequities in cancer care. Working with other countries to apply this framework also provides a uniform approach to understand and reduce inequities across a range of innovations and address the global mission to improve cancer care for all.

Self Management Special Interest Group Workshop: Opportunity to explore the impact and lessons learned of person centred and community centred self management and co-production as vital components of health and social care integration and transformation. 

The Self Management Special Interest Group (SIG) aims to facilitate collaboration across sectors and countries to enhance our understanding, adoption and evaluation of self management and co-production and continually ask “what needs to be done in order that everyone is able to self manage on their terms?
 The SIG and workshop session is for people with lived experience, practitioners, managers, researchers, students, policy makers and health economists engaged in planning, designing, delivering and evaluating self management and co-production principles and approaches to engage, empower and enable people centred integrated care in different health and care systems.
 The concepts and reality of self management and self-care have increased in importance and practice throughout the pandemic and its recovery. As systems transformation is progressed through co-designing and reforming services at all levels self management is supporting people to live their lives better, on their own terms.
 Self management supports and encourages people living with long tern conditions to access information and to develop skills to find out what’s right for their own conditions, most importantly, right for them through being:
 
 Better informed about their conditions(s)
 Better prepared for everyday changes
 Better supported when they need it
 
 Outcomes
 
 The SIG workshop presents the opportunity for participants to network, share and celebrate self management learning, evaluation and impact. •Participants explore their goals for self management and how these can be connected or shared to improve and enhance self management support and person and community centred approaches globally.
 Exploring and translating the learning and themes shared into tangible actions in their own contexts.
 
 Session Plan
 
 Welcome and session introduction
 Icebreaker: invite participants to introduce themselves in small groups (in person and online) in small groups and answer ‘to me self management is …..’
 Four themed case studies will be shared
 Facilitated small group discussions
 
 oWhat are the key messages for you and your context
 oHow can these key messages be translated into your action planning
 oParticipants will be invited to make one small action that they will implement in their own context. Action will be captured in the chat box and through large labels which will be added to the ICIC23 self management tree
 
 Each group will feedback one key point which will be captured live through flipchart and chat box
 
 At the end of the session, we will capture feedback, key themes and the self management tree actions and develop a SIG blog and plan for the next Integrated Care Matters Self Management and Co-production webinar in 2023.

International evidence on lived experiences of trauma during homelessness and effects on mental health including substance use: a co-produced qualitative systematic review

BackgroundTrauma is an experience (physical or emotional) that is life-threatening, harmful, or out of the ordinary and has lasting effects on mental health and wellbeing. Much of the information about trauma within homeless populations focuses on events in childhood. Using coproduction principles, we aimed to synthesise qualitative evidence exploring the impact of trauma during adulthood homelessness on mental health, including substance use. MethodsIn this qualitative systematic review, we searched ASSIA, CINAHL, Cochrane, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Proquest theses and dissertations, PsychInfo, Scopus, and Web of Science for studies published from inception until Sept 6, 2022, alongside grey literature from relevant websites. Search terms were developed based on the PICO framework. No language, date, or geographical limits were applied. Any qualitative research reporting experiences of trauma and its impact on mental health during homelessness in adults was eligible. We extracted relevant data (eg, methodology, sample characteristics, homelessness, and findings). People with lived experience of homelessness were provided with bespoke training by the lead researcher. They contributed to refining the review aims, screening, coding, and theme development. Quality was assessed using the CASP Qualitative Studies Checklist. FindingsWe included 26 qualitative papers, including 876 adults experiencing homelessness between ages 18 and 70 years (448 [51%] women and 428 [49%] men). All papers focused on urban settings. Eight papers were from the USA, five from Canada, four from the UK and Australia, three from Brazil, and one from Ethiopia and Iran. A framework synthesis of these 26 papers identified three preliminary themes. People experiencing homelessness make sense of trauma in three ways: internalised understanding, relationality to others, and with a survival lens. Coping strategies for managing feelings of fear, anxiety, and depression included substance use, self-rationalisation, and strategies to feel safe. Finally, when people experienced repeated trauma, they became either dissociated, and accepted their situation, or resilient, wishing to change their circumstances. InterpretationFurther evidence is needed in rural or coastal regions, where people experiencing homelessness may face greater isolation. Trauma rarely takes place in isolation, and often previous experiences of trauma shape how people experiencing homelessness make sense of trauma and cope with it. Support to address coping with the effects of trauma should focus on ensuring people do not become desensitised and prevent deterioration of mental health and substance use. The strength of this review is its coproduction with people with lived experience. Single person data extraction with secondary checks was a limitation. FundingNational Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) School for Primary Care Research as part of the Three NIHR Research Schools Mental Health Programme.

Commentary on “positive family connections: co-producing a virtual group programme for family carers of children with learning disabilities or who are autistic”

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to provide a commentary on Griffin et al.’s paper, “Positive family connections: Co-producing a virtual group programme for family carers of children with learning disabilities or who are autistic”.Design/methodology/approachThis is a commentary on co-production, drawing on Griffin et al.’s paper and the values base of the field.FindingsCo-production is a valuable approach which seeks to empower and include key people in research. As suggested by Griffin et al., disseminating learning about co-production is an important additional principle of co-production, which demonstrates a values-based commitment to co-production.Originality/valueThis commentary is aimed at professionals and researchers working in the field of learning disabilities who are keen to learn about and do co-production.

Co-production opportunities seized and missed in decision-support frameworks for climate-change adaptation in agriculture – How do we practice the “best practice”?

CONTEXTTo contribute to building sustainable and effective climate change adaptation solutions avoiding usability gap, it is largely recommended to engage in the process of co-production, integrating expertise and knowledge from various academic and non-academic actors. OBJECTIVEWe want to learn if and how co-production, believed to effectively link knowledge and decision-making, and thus suggested as the best practice in building decision-support frameworks, is really applied in the frameworks that are being implemented on the ground. METHODSA literature review allowed us to identify integrated decision-support frameworks for climate-change adaptation in agriculture developed and used over the period of the last 10 years and involving non-academic stakeholders. To analyse them, we chose as an assessment tool the four co-production principles proposed by Norström and colleagues: context-based, pluralistic, goal-oriented and interactive. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONSThe useful entry points for incorporating co-production in the design of decision-support that we found in the reviewed frameworks include among the others adequate participants selection strategy, building on existing interaction spaces, developing a theory of change with the participants, and involving participants in the design of different elements of the method. The architectures of the analyzed frameworks contained more elements that responded to pluralistic and interactive principles than to context-based and goal oriented principles, we have also identified gaps in the design, such as taking into account the personal characteristics of researchers that could strengthen a framework's implementation and its impact, or attempts at bridging different levels of decision making, to cover the triad of science, policy and practice. A detailed look at the decision-frameworks that are actually being applied allows for a critical reflection whether and how we as researchers use what we preach as an effective way of responding to sustainability challenges in agriculture. Co-production principles turn out to be a useful tool for analysis and we suggest they can be used as a check-list when designing decision-support frameworks for climate-change adaptation. SIGNIFICANCEThis papers offers useful examples of how to shift the research-led processes of decision-support towards more co-production with non-academic actors, to increase chances of bridging the gaps between science, policy and practice.

Who uses recovery colleges? Casemix analysis of sociodemographic and clinical characteristics and representativeness of recovery college students.

Recovery Colleges support recovery for adults with mental health problems, through coproduction and education principles. This study aimed to determine whether students at three Recovery Colleges in England were representative of mental health service users. Gender, age, ethnicity, diagnosis, involuntary detention, and inpatient admission were extracted from clinical records. Data for all service user students enrolled, and those who had attended 70% of a Recovery College course were compared to mental health services caseloads, using chi-square goodness-of-fit tests. Clinical records were identified for 1,788 students. Significant differences were identified for gender, age, and diagnosis (p < .001). In some Colleges, more students had recent inpatient admissions or involuntary detentions. Service user students were largely representative of mental health service users, although some groups were underrepresented. Further research is needed to understand why, so that Recovery Colleges can continue to address inequalities. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Narrative Matters: Hidden LIVE - Adam's story - a mental health theatre production as an example of participatory principles and practices.

This article presents the co-production principles underpinning the co-creation of a multimedia theatre production on young people's mental health.

Trauma-informed co-production: Collaborating and combining expertise to improve access to primary care with women with complex needs.

Health, social care, charitable and justice sectors are increasingly recognising the need for trauma-informed services that seek to recognise signs of trauma, provide appropriate paths to recoveryand ensure that services enable people rather than retraumatise. Foundational to the development of trauma-informed services is collaboration with people with lived experience of trauma. Co-production principles may provide a useful framework for this collaboration, due to their emphasis on lived experience, and intent to address power imbalances and promote equity. This article aims to examine trauma-informed and co-production principles to consider the extent to which they overlap and explore how to tailor co-production approaches to support people who have experienced trauma. Bridging Gaps is a collaboration between women who have experienced complex trauma, a charity that supports them, primary care clinicians and health researchers to improve access to trauma-informed primary care. Using co-production principles, we aimed to ensure that women who have experienced trauma were key decision-makers throughout the project. Through reflective notes (n = 19), observations of meetings (n = 3), interviews with people involved in the project (n = 9) and reflective group discussions on our experiences, we share learning, successes and failures. Data analysis followed a framework approach, using trauma-informed principles. Co-production processes can require adaptation when working with people who have experienced trauma. We emphasise the need for close partnership working, flexibilityand transparency around power dynamics, paying particular attention to aspects of power that are less readily visible. Sharing experiences can retrigger trauma. People conducting co-production work need to understand trauma and how this may impact upon an individual's sense of psychological safety. Long-term funding is vital to enable projects to have enough time for the establishment of trust and delivery of tangible results. Co-production principles are highly suitable when developing trauma-informed services. Greater consideration needs to be given as to whether and how people share lived experiences, the need for safe spaces, honesty and humility, difficult dynamics between empowerment and safetyand whether and when blurring boundaries may be helpful. Our findings have applicability to policy-making, funding and service provision to enable co-production processes to become more trauma-informed. Bridging Gaps was started by a group of women who have experienced complex trauma, including addiction, homelessness, mental health problems, sexual exploitation, domestic and sexual violenceand poverty, with a general practitioner (GP) who provides healthcare to this population, alongside a support worker from the charity One25, a charity that supports some of the most marginalised women in Bristol to heal and thrive. More GPs and healthcare researchers joined the group and they have been meeting fortnightly for a period of 4 years with the aim of improving access to trauma-informed primary care. The group uses co-production principles to work together, and we aim to ensure that women who have experienced trauma are key decision-makers throughout our work together. This article is a summary of our learning, informed by discussion, observations and interviews with members of the group.

Addressing the information needs of informal carers in Malawi: a healthcare intervention based on co-creation

PurposeThe aim of this study was to address the unmet information needs of Malawian informal carers. We report on a three-year project which we co-created with informal carers, medical doctors and NGOs with the view to disseminate health advisory messages.Design/methodology/approachThis study was developed on the principles of co-production. The impact of our health advisory messaging approach was assessed through observations and questionnaire-based surveys for quality, clarity and usefulness.FindingsThe messages were disseminated beyond the local support groups and reached a much wider community via word of mouth. The messages also led to short and medium term benefits for informal carers and their loved ones.Originality/valueOur findings highlight the importance of understanding the contextual conditions of informal caring and that of co-producing interventions with the people these aim to benefit.

Reducing opioid related deaths for individuals who are at high risk of death from overdose: a co-production study with people housed within prison and hostel accommodation during Covid-19.

A record number of Opioid-related deaths occurred in Northern Ireland in 2021 and it is acknowledged that the Covid-19 pandemic compounded drugs related deaths crisis. This co-production study set out to refine the design of a wearable device for Opioid users to detect and subsequently prevent a potential overdose situation. Purposive sampling was used to recruit people who had substance use disorders and were living in a hostel and prison during the Covid-19 pandemic. Principles of co-production influenced the study, which encompassed a focus group phase and a wearable phase. The initial phase included three focus groups with participants who inject Opioids and one focus group with workers from a street injector support service. During the wearable phase, the participant group tested the feasibility of the wearable technology in a controlled environment. This included testing the transferability of data from the device to a backend server on the cloud. All focus group participants expressed an interest in the wearable technology when it was presented to them and agreed, that in principle, such a device would be extremely beneficial to help reduce the risk of overdose within the active drug using community. Participants outlined factors which would help or hinder the design of this proposed device and their decision to wear it, if it were readily available to them. Findings from wearable phase indicated that it was feasible to use a wearable device for monitoring Opioid users' biomarkers remotely. The provision of information regarding the specific functionality of the device was considered key and could be disseminated via front line services. The data acquisition and transfer process would not be a barrier for future research. Understanding the benefit and disadvantages of technologies such as a wearable device to prevent Opioid-related deaths will be critical for mitigating the risk of overdose for people who use Heroin. It was also clear that this would be particularly relevant during Covid-19 lock-down periods, when the effects of the pandemic further exacerbated the isolation and solitude experienced by people who use Heroin.