Guest blog, with thanks to the panellists Claire Blamey, Gareth Gault and Shabir Aziz for their feedback.
As we prepare for publication of the report of the ARMA Inquiry into MSK and health inequalities, we look back at how the voices of those with lived experience of MSK conditions have been vital – from the initial evidence gathering to discussion of the dissemination plan.
At the inception of the inquiry process we recruited a panel of paid lived experience experts who brought their unique perspectives of different MSK conditions, backgrounds, and experience of the health system and MSK services to discussions.
Speaking about the panel’s fundamental importance to the inquiry Sue Brown, CEO ARMA said: ‘The ultimate aim of the report is to improve support and outcomes for people with MSK conditions. We can’t do that without hearing their views. Recruiting the panel meant we had more detailed feedback from a lived experience viewpoint across the whole project. Their input influenced every aspect of the report and gave us confidence that the content and recommendations would deliver.’
While the contribution of the lived experience panel has been invaluable to ARMA throughout the past year, we less often have the opportunity to hear from those involved in co-production about their experience.
The panel welcomed the opportunity to share their insights and their advice for achieving better outcomes in co-producing. They found their involvement in the ARMA inquiry ‘both empowering and hopeful of having some real impact on MSK health policies’ and for Gareth, the project was enhanced by insights given through the ‘lived experience lens’.
The panellists also discussed the importance of relationship dynamics more widely between those co-producing with Shabir noting that the relationship ‘should be equal’ allowing ‘both parties to make equal impact on the issues.’ Gareth added that when we talk about working together this means ‘working collaboratively, openly and with equity.’
The panel shared their ideas for how services and organisations can better embed co-production in their workstreams:
- When creating a timeline for involvement, start with an in-person planning day.
- Build in smaller ‘task & finish’ groups as well as larger meetings.
- Build a list of health and support groups with view to recruiting MSK patients who wish to engage in co-production.
- Create a co-production ‘Charter’ showing your commitment to effective co-production and how to achieve this practically.
- Build in regular reviews of co-production policy and impact – with evaluation of its relevance, impact on research and whether it meets (or supersedes) national standards / best practice models.
- Discuss pre / post planning polling and timeframe with lived experience partners.
- Staff and lived experience partners co-designing and co-delivering talks and speeches – ‘co-production in action.’
There are some great resources out there to support this way of working:
- ARMA – Working in partnership with patients
- NHS England – Co-production resource toolkit
- Value of Co-Production – Co-Production Collective
There was one final, poignant lesson from the panel. Claire cautioned that we need to ‘ensure that co-production is at the forefront of the task/research/strategy and not at the end as a footnote.’