I disagree, with only 10% that almost fully recover the design of the hospital has almost nothing to do with recovery. With 'care' in the title you're not even trying to get survivors recovered. You blithering idiots need to focus on stopping the 5 causes of the neuronal cascade of death in the first week saving billions of neurons. Then your rehab just might work.
Oops, I'm not playing by the polite rules of Dale Carnegie, 'How to Win Friends and Influence People'.
Telling stroke medical persons they know nothing about stroke is a no-no even if it is true.
Politeness will never solve anything in stroke. Yes, I'm a bomb thrower and proud of it. Someday a stroke 'leader' will try to ream me out for making them look bad by being truthful , I look forward to that day.
Why hospital design matters: A narrative review of built environments research relevant to stroke care
Abstract
Healthcare facilities are among the most expensive buildings to construct, maintain, and operate. How building design can best support healthcare services, staff, and patients is important to consider. In this narrative review, we outline why the healthcare environment matters and describe areas of research focus and current built environment evidence that supports healthcare in general and stroke care in particular. Ward configuration, corridor design, and staff station placements can all impact care provision, staff and patient behavior. Contrary to many new ward design approaches, single-bed rooms are neither uniformly favored, nor strongly evidence-based, for people with stroke. Green spaces are important both for staff (helping to reduce stress and errors), patients and relatives, although access to, and awareness of, these and other communal spaces is often poor. Built environment research specific to stroke is limited but increasing, and we highlight emerging collaborative multistakeholder partnerships (Living Labs) contributing to this evidence base. We believe that involving engaged and informed clinicians in design and research will help shape better hospitals of the future.
Introduction
Imagine (re-)designing the very hospital you work in. What would you design differently? What would you change, to benefit you, your patients, and their families? What evidence might help guide those design decisions?
Healthcare facilities are among the most expensive buildings to construct, maintain, and operate.1 Once built, hospitals remain in service for decades and are difficult to modify. With stakes this high, considering how building design best supports healthcare services is important. In this narrative review, we outline why the built environment matters, with particular focus on stroke care. We also discuss challenges inherent in designing healthcare environments, undertaking research and evaluating completed architecture.
The planning and design process for new healthcare environments is incredibly complex, but, in general, it occurs in three overlapping stages: (1) the planning stage in which the healthcare provider describes the users’ needs, model of care, and clinical program in a functional brief that summarizes the requirements for the new hospital; (2) the design stage in which these requirements are interpreted by architects to develop an initial concept which is then refined to a more detailed design; and (3) the delivery stage in which the building is constructed. The extent to which hospital staff and patients are included at each stage of this process can vary significantly between projects.2
Healthcare professionals have long advocated for design features thought to benefit health and well-being, such as natural light, ventilation, and space between patients—for example, the circular hospital design proposed by the physician Antoine Petit3 and long “Nightingale wards” proposed by Florence Nightingale.4 Hospital design is now informed by a process termed “evidence-based design” (EBD), in which research evidence is used alongside other considerations such as the healthcare context, budget, and architects’ experience, to inform the design of the healthcare built environment.5,6 In this context, the “healthcare built environment” encompasses: (1) the physical construction (layout, room dimensions, doors and window placement, outdoor and community access, etc.), (2) ambient features (noise, air quality, light, temperature, etc.), and (3) interior design (furniture, signage, equipment, artwork, etc.).7 Analogous to evidence-based clinical practice, hospitals designed following best research evidence garnered from EBD processes have better safety, patient outcomes, staff retention, and operation costs.8,9 The Center for Health Design, established in 1993 to advance EBD, now maintains a repository of over 5,000 articles on healthcare design (https://www.healthdesign.org).
The field is growing; however, many healthcare contexts, including stroke, have a limited built environment evidence base.10 Establishing geographically organized stroke units has been an important focus11; however, these studies rarely address specifics of the built environment, and we know little about optimal stroke unit design. Stroke clinical guidelines rarely mention the built environment nor provide guidance on how the environment might best support care. There are currently no stroke care-specific building standards, nor standardized checklists to evaluate the quality of these environments.12
Why is the built environment neglected? Clinicians may identify as knowing less about how the environment might influence patient care or staff well-being. They may also feel uninformed about the design process and how to contribute their clinical expertise to influence decision-making. To begin to address these gaps, our objectives for this review were: (1) to introduce readers to healthcare built environment research and (2) to highlight evidence that underpins acute, subacute, or rehabilitation stroke care facility design. This review is in three parts:
Overview of healthcare built environment research;
Stroke care built environment evidence; and
Planning and design of new healthcare environments: Challenges and opportunities.
We include research from recent, relevant systematic reviews, other evidence summaries, and selected qualitative and mixed-methods research focusing on healthcare environments and design. Healthcare environments are complex and context-specific, with many interdependent variables that can rarely be isolated. This complex system does not readily lend itself to highly controlled experimental research designs in real-life settings.13 Qualitative methods, such as case studies and pre- and post-occupancy evaluations (before and after a redesign or redevelopment), are common. With research still developing, heterogeneity exists in research designs, outcomes, environments, populations, and theoretical frameworks employed.14 Hence, robust summary evidence derived from meta-analyses is lacking.
No comments:
Post a Comment