World Cafés Create Healthier Communities for Rural, Older Adults Living With Diabetes

Abstract

Our global population is aging at an accelerated pace. While the average life expectancy has seen dramatic increases, chronic disease and disability have also increased, with rural America tending to be older, sicker, and poorer. This article examines the implementation and outcomes associated with the community engagement method of the world café that was instrumental in developing a "culture of health" aimed to reduce diabetes-related inequalities for older adults in rural counties of Kentucky. Older residents and the organizations that serve them participated in world cafés, which resulted in collective action due to the wisdom and capacity that evolve from the core element of the method, conversational sharing via multiple small group interactions. Four world cafés were held to explore the desires of the communities related to healthy eating, exercise, smoking cessation, and diabetes care. The world cafés brought a diverse group of community residents and governmental and business leaders to discuss topics that matter to their community, leading to the development of a strategic plan and a scorecard and, ultimately, community empowerment.

Public involvement in the planning, development and implementation of community health services: A scoping review of public involvement methods

“…The 39 studies pursued very different aims, which were categorised as follows: (a) public involvement in the design and/or planning of health services (Carlisle et al., 2018; Clark, 1997; Crowley et al., 2002; Farmer & Nimegeer, 2014; Green et al., 2004; Katzburg et al., 2009; Khodyakov et al., 2014; Lee et al., 2009; Myers et al., 2020; Nimegeer et al., 2016; Twible, 1992; Valaitis et al., 2019; Woods, 2009), (b) public involvement in the development of existing or new health services (Díez et al., 2018; Jeffery & Ervin, 2011; Katzburg et al., 2009; LaNoue et al., 2016; Lazenbatt et al., 2001; Munoz, 2013; Muurinen, 2019; Nancarrow et al., 2004; Owens et al., 2010; Rains & Ray, 1995; Risisky et al., 2008; Rosén, 2006; Rowa‐Dewar et al., 2008; Seim & Slettebø, 2011; Timotijevic & Raats, 2007; Uding et al., 2009; Winter et al., 2016; Yankeelov et al., 2019), (c) evaluation of one or several public involvement methods (Carlisle et al., 2018; Goold et al., 2005; Khodyakov et al., 2014; Lamb et al., 2014; Lee et al., 2009; Serapioni & Duxbury, 2012; Timotijevic & Raats, 2007), or (d) descriptions of the application of public involvement methods (Morain et al., 2017; Velonis et al., 2018; Wainwright et al., 2014; Wang, 2006).…”

“…Twenty‐one studies (Díez et al., 2018; Goold et al., 2005; Green et al., 2004; Lamb et al., 2014; LaNoue et al., 2016; Morain et al., 2017; Munoz, 2013; Myers et al., 2020; Owens et al., 2010; Rains & Ray, 1995; Risisky et al., 2008; Rowa‐Dewar et al., 2008; Timotijevic & Raats, 2007; Twible, 1992; Valaitis et al., 2019; Velonis et al., 2018; Wainwright et al., 2014; Wang, 2006; Winter et al., 2016; Woods, 2009; Yankeelov et al., 2019) provided a fully understandable and clear description of the key constructs of the public involvement method, including stepwise instructions for a replication of the public involvement method. Seventeen studies (Carlisle et al., 2018; Clark, 1997; Farmer & Nimegeer, 2014; Iyer et al., 2015; Jeffery & Ervin, 2011; Katzburg et al., 2009; Khodyakov et al., 2014; Lazenbatt et al., 2001; Lee et al., 2009; Muurinen, 2019; Nancarrow et al., 2004; Nimegeer et al., 2016; Rosén, 2006; Seim & Slettebø, 2011; Serapioni & Duxbury, 2012; Uding et al., 2009; Zani & Cicognani, 2009) provided a partial description of the key constructs and procedures, but provided inadequate instructions on replication.…”

“…With respect to the ease of use and operationalisability , 18 studies (Díez et al., 2018; Goold et al., 2005; Green et al., 2004; Khodyakov et al., 2014; LaNoue et al., 2016; Myers et al., 2020; Owens et al., 2010; Rains & Ray, 1995; Risisky et al., 2008; Rowa‐Dewar et al., 2008; Timotijevic & Raats, 2007; Valaitis et al., 2019; Velonis et al., 2018; Wainwright et al., 2014; Wang, 2006; Winter et al., 2016; Woods, 2009; Yankeelov et al., 2019) gave full descriptions of the operationalisation of their public involvement method. A further 16 studies (Carlisle et al., 2018; Farmer & Nimegeer, 2014; Jeffery & Ervin, 2011; Lamb et al., 2014; Lazenbatt et al., 2001; Morain et al., 2017; Munoz, 2013; Muurinen, 2019; Nancarrow et al., 2004; Nimegeer et al., 2016; Rosén, 2006; Seim & Slettebø, 2011; Serapioni & Duxbury, 2012; Twible, 1992; Uding et al., 2009; Zani & Cicognani, 2009) provided a partial description the operationalisation of the key constructs and procedures.…”

“…These studies were typically based on the participatory action research and community‐based research approach. Fourteen of the studies (Farmer & Nimegeer, 2014; Iyer et al., 2015; Jeffery & Ervin, 2011; LaNoue et al., 2016; Morain et al., 2017; Munoz, 2013; Nimegeer et al., 2016; Owens et al., 2010; Rosén, 2006; Timotijevic & Raats, 2007; Twible, 1992; Uding et al., 2009; Wang, 2006; Yankeelov et al., 2019) this aspect was partially addressed. Seven studies (Clark, 1997; Crowley et al., 2002; Green et al., 2004; Katzburg et al., 2009; Lee et al., 2009; Nancarrow et al., 2004; Risisky et al., 2008) failed to report on underlying theory or principals (Table 3).…”

World Café method integrated with QFD for obtaining the Voice of the Customer

“…Barbosa & Hoffmann (2013) used the method to evaluate the forms of support more attractive for the admission into an incubation process and for the consolidation of companies in a technology incubator. Yankeelov et al (2018) examined the implementation and outcomes associated with community engagement method of World Café, which was instrumental in the development of a "culture of health" to reduce inequalities related to diabetes in the elderly in rural counties in Kentucky.…”