Creating Safer Healthcare Environments Using an Evidence-Based Design Process

2017 ◽  
pp. 83-94
Author(s):  
Anjali Joseph ◽  
Ellen Taylor ◽  
Xiaobo Quan
Keyword(s):  
Design Process ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Healthcare Environments

scholarly journals From Evidence to Design Solution—On How to Handle Evidence in the Design Process of Sustainable, Accessible and Health-Promoting Landscapes

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (6) ◽  
pp. 3249
Author(s):  
Marie C. Gramkow ◽  
Ulrik Sidenius ◽  
Gaochao Zhang ◽  
Ulrika K. Stigsdotter
Keyword(s):  
Design Process ◽  
Process Model ◽  
Design Solution ◽  
Design Criteria ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Design Program ◽  
Evidence Collection ◽  
Health Promoting ◽  
Development Goals ◽  
Programming Step

The work of landscape architects can contribute to the United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goals and the associated ‘Leave no one behind’ agenda by creating accessible and health-promoting green spaces (especially goals 3, 10 and 11). To ensure that the design of green space delivers accessibility and intended health outcomes, an evidence-based design process is recommended. This is a challenge, since many landscape architects are not trained in evidence-based design, and leading scholars have called for methods that can help landscape architects work in an evidence-based manner. This paper examines the implementation of a process model for evidence-based health design in landscape architecture. The model comprises four steps: ‘evidence collection’, ‘programming’, ‘designing’, and ‘evaluation’. The paper aims to demonstrate how the programming step can be implemented in the design of a health-promoting nature trail that is to offer people with mobility disabilities improved mental, physical and social health. We demonstrate how the programming step systematizes evidence into design criteria (evidence-based goals) and design solutions (how the design criteria are to be solved in the design). The results of the study are presented as a design ‘Program’, which we hope can serve as an example for landscape architects of how evidence can be translated into design.

Evaluating Human-Centred Design for Public Health: A Case Study on Developing a Healthcare App with Refugee Communities. (Preprint)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebeccah Bartlett
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Reproductive Health ◽  
Design Process ◽  
Culturally Relevant ◽  
Design Thinking ◽  
Underserved Populations ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Service Utilisation ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Human Centred Design

BACKGROUND Australian women from migrant and refugee communities report less sexual and reproductive health (SRH) awareness. They experience reduced access to SRH-specific care as well as culturally-relevant support that could assist them to make evidence-based decisions about their own health and service utilisation. Addressing public health problems through human-centred design (HCD) is an ethical and effective approach to developing solutions with underserved populations that are more likely to experience significant disadvantage or social marginalisation. OBJECTIVE This study aimed to evaluate the HCD approach that Shifra, a small Australian-based not-for-profit focused on improving access to healthcare for refugees and new migrants, undertook in developing a web-based application to deliver local, evidence-based and culturally relevant SRH information to its users. The evaluation focused on the following three questions: 1. To what extent did Shifra complete all the steps of the design thinking process shown? 2. To what extent did the final Shifra app incorporate the contributions of all co-designers? 3. To what extent were the co-designers satisfied with the process? METHODS The primary data for the first question involved a thorough review of all of Shifra’s organisational documents. Since there is a notable lack of validated tools evaluate HCD projects a maturity rubric was designed to synthesise the findings from the document review. This rubric was developed through consultation and several iterations of feedback from the expert panel were used to improve the usability, completeness and level of detail of the rubric. RESULTS A co-design process was successfully applied to the development of a web-based app for refugee and migrant women in reproductive health. This evaluation also yielded several important recommendations for improving Shifra’s HCD approach moving forward, findings that can be applied to other projects seeking to undertake an authentic community co-design process. First, with so many people of diverse backgrounds contributing to the project, clear communication about roles and expectations is critical. Second, it is important to set realistic expectations and role clarifications with co-designers. Third, it is important not to view all end users as interchangeable. Finally, by setting aside adequate time to develop collaborative relationships amongst all co-design groups the HCD process is an opportunity to give power and control back to the end user population for whom one is designing the health intervention. CONCLUSIONS Improving refugees’ access to SRH is complex and multidimensional and requires innovative and thoughtful problem solving. HCD is one way to address complex problems in an ethical and effective way and it is how Shifra chose to approach the development of its solution to this problem. This evaluation of Shifra’s HCD approach provides a helpful and rigorous guide in reporting that may encourage other organisations undertaking HCD work to evaluate their own implementation. CLINICALTRIAL N/A

Evidence-Based Design and Research-Informed Design: What’s the Difference? Conceptual Definitions and Comparative Analysis

2017 ◽  
Vol 10 (5) ◽  
pp. 143-156 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erin Peavey ◽  
Kiley B. Vander Wyst
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Design Process ◽  
Theoretical Development ◽  
Critical Examination ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Clear Definition ◽  
Methods Of Evaluation ◽  
Information Research ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Conceptual Meaning

Objective: This article provides critical examination and comparison of the conceptual meaning and underlying assumptions of the concepts evidence-based design (EBD) and research-informed design (RID) in order to facilitate practical use and theoretical development. Background: In recent years, EBD has experienced broad adoption, yet it has been simultaneously critiqued for rigidity and misapplication. Many practitioners are gravitating to the term RID to describe their method of integrating knowledge into the design process. However, the term RID lacks a clear definition and the blurring of terms has the potential to weaken advances made integrating research into practice. Method: Concept analysis methods from Walker and Avant were used to define the concepts for comparison. Results: Conceptual definitions, process descriptions, examples (i.e., model cases), and methods of evaluation are offered for EBD and RID. Although EBD and RID share similarities in meaning, the two terms are distinct. When comparing evidence based (EB) and research informed, EB is a broad base of information types (evidence) that are narrowly applied (based), while the latter references a narrow slice of information (research) that is broadly applied (informed) to create an end product of design. Conclusions: Much of the confusion between the use of the concepts EBD and RID arises out of differing perspectives between the way practitioners and academics understand the underlying terms. The authors hope this article serves to generate thoughtful dialogue, which is essential to the development of a discipline, and look forward to the contribution of the readership.

scholarly journals Evidence-based design utilized in hospital architecture and changing the design process: a hospital case study

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Suining Ding
Keyword(s):  
Design Process ◽  
Architectural Design ◽  
Process Model ◽  
Research Evidence ◽  
The United States ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Staff Retention ◽  
Design Process Model ◽  
Hospital Architecture

As a new paradigm in healthcare design in the 21st century, evidence-based design (EBD) has played a critical role in the changing hospital architectural design process and shaping new images of hospital architecture. Evidence-based design is research informed, and its results affect not only patients' clinical outcomes but also medical facility operational efficiency and its staff retention and satisfaction. This research investigated how EBD was implemented in hospital architectural design and how traditional design process was modified to incorporate credible research evidence through a case study at Grand River Hospital in the United States. This study took a qualitative approach with grounded theory methodology. The methods used for this research were multiple sources of data collection through document reviews, observations, and interviews. Findings revealed that the investigation for EBD needs to focus on environment-behavior studies especially in the development of explanatory theory. This study also recommended a modified cyclical design process model for integrating EBD. This redefined design process model requires collaborations with all stakeholders by adding visioning sessions, multiple design charrettes, mock-ups, and the functional performance evaluation to help to implement research evidence and make design decisions to achieve the best possible outcomes.

Implementation of Evidence-Based Design (EBD) by Non-Healthcare Design Practitioners

2014 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 165 ◽  
Author(s):  
Caren Samter Martin
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Design Process ◽  
Exploratory Study ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Healthcare Design ◽  
Design Solutions ◽  
Base Design

Evidence-based design (EBD) is an innovation to the normative design process for practitioners who strive to base design solutions on measurable outcomes. Published information about EBD—its purpose, process, and outcomes springs primarily from healthcare design sources. Little is known about the adoption of an EBD-approach by practitioners of other building types (offices, schools) or their degree of engagement with EBD. This study examined non-healthcare focused design practitioners’ current 1) understanding of EBD, 2) degree of implementation of EBD, and 3) interest in learning more about EBD as determined from an exploratory study via interviews of 10 multidisciplinary firms’ leaders. Findings indicated that these firms practiced normative design, having little knowledge of or engagement with EBD. To help identify reasons for this delay towards EBD, a comparative analysis of EBD-approaches in books published for design practitioners was conducted. It revealed a broad range of approaches, limited timelines for implementation, and promotion of practitioner/researcher collaborations. Additional resources/tools are needed by the non-healthcare focused design practitioners to support implementation of an EBD-approach into their normative design process.

The integrated and evidence-based design of healthcare environments

2014 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 243-263 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joost van Hoof ◽  
Paul G.S. Rutten ◽  
Christian Struck ◽  
Emelieke R.C.M. Huisman ◽  
Helianthe S.M. Kort
Keyword(s):  
Evidence Based ◽  
Healthcare Environments

The role of evidence-based design in informing health-care architects

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Fouad Jalal Mahmood
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Design Process ◽  
Architectural Design ◽  
Relevant Literature ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Support Design ◽  
Design Decisions ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Traditional Design

Purpose This study aims to trace the relationship between the evidence-based design (EBD) process and decision-making during the architectural design process, the barriers to informing health-care architects and possible methods to overcome these barriers. Design/methodology/approach This study aims to explore the barriers to the EBD process during the design process by reviewing the relevant literature and future steps to overcome these barriers and support design decisions. Findings The study shows that EBD is a relevant, useful tool for providing evidence that positively affects design decisions. This study divides EBD barriers into simple barriers and complex barriers, depending on the nature of the barrier. Additionally, methods to overcome these barriers are discussed to ensure the best use of EBD findings with a significant impact on health-care design decisions, as they are core elements in informing architects, especially when combined with the traditional design process. This study investigates how likely it is for the EBD to contribute optimally to design decisions depending on architects’ skills and cooperation with researchers. Originality/value This study can apprize health-care architects of the need to consider the role of EBD in improving the quality of design decisions, and the importance of combining EBD with the traditional design process to implement optimal design decisions.

scholarly journals The use of lighting simulation in the evidence-based design process: A case study approach using visual comfort analysis in offices

2019 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 141-153 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anahita Davoodi ◽  
Peter Johansson ◽  
Myriam Aries
Keyword(s):  
Design Process ◽  
Evaluation Method ◽  
Performance Metrics ◽  
Evaluation Criteria ◽  
Human Perception ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Visual Comfort ◽  
User Perception ◽  
Lighting Simulation

Abstract The EBD-SIM (evidence-based design, simulation) framework is a conceptual framework developed to integrate the use of lighting simulation in the EBD process to provide a holistic performance evaluation method. A real-time case study, executed in a fully operational office building, is used to demonstrate the framework’s performance. The case study focused on visual comfort analysis. The objective is to demonstrate the applicability of the developed EBD-SIM framework using correlations between current visual comfort metrics and actual human perception as evaluation criteria. The data were collected via simulation for visual comfort analysis and via questionnaires for instantaneous and annual visual comfort perception. The study showed that for user perception, the most crucial factor for visual comfort is the amount of light on a task area, and simple metrics such as Eh-room and Eh-task had a higher correlation with perceived visual comfort than complex performance metrics such as Daylight Autonomy (DA). To improve the design process, the study suggests that, among other things, post-occupancy evaluations (POEs) should be conducted more frequently to obtain better insight into user perception of daylight and subsequently use new evidence to further improve the design of the EBD-SIM model.

Post-Occupancy Evaluation of a Crisis Shelter Garden and Application of Findings Through the Use of a Participatory Design Process

2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 153-167 ◽  
Author(s):  
Victoria L. Lygum ◽  
Dorthe V. Poulsen ◽  
Dorthe Djernis ◽  
Hanne G. Djernis ◽  
Ulrik Sidenius ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Design Process ◽  
Participatory Design ◽  
Design Guidelines ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Post Occupancy Evaluation ◽  
Therapeutic Setting ◽  
User Groups ◽  
Women And Children ◽  
Crisis Shelters ◽  
Further Development

Objective: This study concerned optimization of an evidence-based crisis shelter garden as a setting for everyday activities and nature-based therapy. The study hereby tested the design guidelines that the garden is based on. Background: Design guidelines for gardens intended to support health are becoming increasingly specialized, targeting different user groups. This study contributes to the knowledge concerning health-supporting garden design at crisis shelters for women and children who are exposed to domestic violence. Method: The study included a post-occupancy evaluation (POE) consisting of landscape analyses, observation of physical traces, and interviews as well as a subsequent participatory design process. Results: The landscape analyses and the observation of physical traces indicated a minimal level of maintenance and recurrent use being limited to a few areas of the garden. The interviews added nuance and new issues to these results, resulting in the following themes: maintenance, accessibility, safety, therapeutic setting and free space, many ways to play, and social and private spheres. The participatory design process led to an optimization of the garden, including changes to its physical design related to making the garden safer, positively distractive, and more versatile in terms of activities. Improvements were also made regarding policy for use, maintenance, and informing users. Conclusion: The design guidelines were tested, and the evidence was strengthened, adding nuance and new issues to consider during further development of the guidelines. Both the POE and the participatory design process were confirmed as crucial aspects of evidence-based health design.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document