This is the second edition of the Startup Workbook. This workbook is different from the first version. The first version, which was made with a so called touch-grant from Saxion, was primarily a digital version. In addition, the book was printed as a deluxe edition in a limited number of copies. The eBook has quickly been downloaded thousands of times through the website (www.startupwerkboek.nl). By using the Startup Work-book by Startups in the Startup Center Saxion (part of the Center for Entrepreneurship) it was revealed that one has a need to really use it as a workbook. That is, the questions that are in the book, must be filled in. Some Startups printed out the downloaded version, to be able to use it for writing answers. The printed version has therefore become a real book. That means that the questions can be answered directly in the book. It is in a writable form. If you have access to the Toolbox, you can also fill in the online questionnaire after each step, which you then will get mailed back. If required we can then remotely assist you with your cus-tomer development based on your reply. Another change in this version is that the business devel-opment trajectory isn’t spread over 12 weeks, but spread over 12 steps. A startup probably needs a week for a certain step, whereas another startup may sometimes need more time. This second edition is still primarily an eBook, which is free to download. The advantage of the eBook is that adjustments can be made quickly (the knowledge and methodologies for startups go so fast), and direct links to other website can be used easier when presented in an electronic way.
MULTIFILE
Background Providing individualized care based on the context and preferences of the patient is important. Knowledge on both prognostic risk stratification and blended eHealth care in musculoskeletal conditions is increasing and seems promising. Stratification can be used to match patients to the most optimal content and intensity of treatment as well as mode of treatment delivery (i.e. face-to-face or blended with eHealth). However, research on the integration of stratified and blended eHealth care with corresponding matched treatment options for patients with neck and/or shoulder complaints is lacking. Methods This study was a mixed methods study comprising the development of matched treatment options, followed by an evaluation of the feasibility of the developed Stratified Blended Physiotherapy approach. In the first phase, three focus groups with physiotherapists and physiotherapy experts were conducted. The second phase investigated the feasibility (i.e. satisfaction, usability and experiences) of the Stratified Blended Physiotherapy approach for both physiotherapists and patients in a multicenter single-arm convergent parallel mixed methods feasibility study. Results In the first phase, matched treatment options were developed for six patient subgroups. Recommendations for content and intensity of physiotherapy were matched to the patient’s risk of persistent disabling pain (using the Keele STarT MSK Tool: low/medium/high risk). In addition, selection of mode of treatment delivery was matched to the patient’s suitability for blended care (using the Dutch Blended Physiotherapy Checklist: yes/no). A paperbased workbook and e-Exercise app modules were developed as two different mode of treatment delivery options, to support physiotherapists. Feasibility was evaluated in the second phase. Physiotherapists and patients were mildly satisfied with the new approach. Usability of the physiotherapist dashboard to set up the e-Exercise app was considered ‘OK’ by physiotherapists. Patients considered the e-Exercise app to be of ‘best imaginable’ usability. The paper-based workbook was not used. Conclusion Results of the focus groups led to the development of matched treatment options. Results of the feasibility study showed experiences with integrating stratified and blended eHealth care and have informed amendments to the Stratified Blended Physiotherapy approach for patients with neck and/or shoulder complaints ready to use within a future cluster randomized trial.
All social media should have a sticker saying 'Don't Jump for the Tool!' While it is tempting 'to use Twitter', the choice of a medium like Twitter cannot be seen in isolation of strategic goals, instruments and expected results, i.e. a communication strategy. We designed a board game, called the Media Strategy Game, which makes professionals aware of the choices and opportunities involved in developing a communication strategy. By playing the game, assumptions about objectives and results are made explicit and awareness is created for the activities needed to achieve objectives. The game therefore serves to stimulate discussions, provides insights for the development of an efficient media policy, and helps to create consensus. While designed for professionals who need to communicate a message inside or outside of an organization, it has also proved very valuable in trainings and in higher education. Recently a workbook has been added to the board game that helps professionals to formulate their communication strategy by providing 16 hands-on models for business strategy, business modelling, leveraging tools and formulating indicators to measure impact.
