Utilization of a Standardized Post-Occupancy Evaluation to Assess the Guiding Principles of a Major Academic Medical Center

A Systematic Literature Review on Healthcare Facility Evaluation Methods

To present a systematic literature review on predesign evaluation (PDE), postoccupancy evaluation (POE), and evidence-based design (EBD); to delimit the concepts and relationships of these terms and place them in the building life cycle framework to guide their application and indicate a common understanding and possible gaps. The preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses protocol was used. Inclusion criteria cover texts that present a concept, method, procedure, or tool and use the example in healthcare services or other environments. The reports were excluded if there was no evidence of a relationship between the terms, if cited rhetorically, duplicated, or if an instrument was not related to at least one other term. The identification used Scopus and Web of Science and considered reports until December 2021 (search period). When extracting the evidence, formal quality criteria were observed and sentences and other elements were collected as evidence and tabulated to segment topics of interest. The searches identified 799 reports with 494 duplicates. In the selection, 53 records were selected from 305 obtained in 14 searches. The classification extracted concepts, relationships, and frameworks. Results indicate a consistent understanding of POE and EBD and a diffuse understanding of PDE. A summary of the three concepts including two frameworks is proposed. Situations are contextualized where these frameworks are used in specific areas of research. One of these frameworks provides a basis for classifying building assessment methods, procedures, and tools but does not detail the classification criteria. Thus, more detailed adjustments should be considered in specific studies.

Staff participation in design with multiple tools: Impact on design and POE results

OBJECTIVE

This is a concluding part of an action research study to evaluate the impact on healthcare staff participation in the design of a new intensive care unit (ICU). Staff participated with multiple tools in the design; during the predesign phase utilizing co-design and virtual mock-ups, and also participating in the predesign evaluation (PDE) and postoccupancy evaluation (POE). Both the ICU design and evaluations were based on the principles of evidence-based design studies.

METHOD

Staff satisfaction was evaluated with an online survey comprising 116 statements on 13 different topics used both in PDE and POE. There was space for open-ended comments after each topic.

RESULTS

There was a statistically significant difference (<.001) between PDE and POE results. There were considerable improvements in privacy, accessibility, safety and security, and acoustics. It was assumed that participation in the predesign phase would positively influence POE results, but there were no statistical differences in any topics. However, as a result of collaborative predesign phase, the staff was satisfied with these jointly designed patient rooms. Open-ended questions revealed the importance to continue functional and technical support for staff after commissioning and ensure that technical solutions are practical and well-functioning.

CONCLUSION

The use of PDE and POE assists to set predetermined criteria and evaluate the success of design. Healthcare providers should see POE as a valuable part of design and commissioning process. Additionally, the use of POE should be made more effortless and the results more easily accessible to promote increased interest and usage.

The Continuous Learning Cycle: A Multi-phase Post-occupancy Evaluation (POE) of Decentralized Nursing Unit Design

PURPOSE

This study aims to demonstrate how multiphase postoccupancy evaluation (POE) research was integrated into multiple projects to develop a continuous learning cycle.

BACKGROUND

Despite the well-recognized importance of POE, few studies have reported how knowledge from POE is applied in new designs.

METHOD

This study is developed as a multiphase POE that spanned 3 years and across three units. Phase I POE compared an existing unit (Unit A) in Hospital A and a new Unit B in Hospital B that has implemented innovative design features such as decentralized nurse stations. The idea was to understand the challenges of the existing facility in Hospital A and gather lessons learned from the new design in Unit B to inform the design of the Hospital A expansion (Unit C). After the new expansion was occupied, the Phase II POE was conducted using the same set of POE tools in both Unit C and Unit A. The POE applied the following methods: (1) patient room evaluations using the Center for Health Design standardized POE tools, (2) space syntax analysis of visibility, and (3) a pre- and postmove analysis of Press Ganey data.

RESULTS

The results demonstrated that by incorporating lessons learned from the Phase I POE, Unit C has further improvement on patient room design ratings, improved patient satisfaction, and better visibility among nurse work areas compared to Unit A and Unit B.

CONCLUSIONS

The multiphase, multisite POE with standardized tools has demonstrated its value as an important tool for continuous design quality improvement.

Design Thinking for Healthcare: Transliterating the Creative Problem-Solving Method Into Architectural Practice

PURPOSE

The purpose of this article is to define design thinking, provide insights into how it may be integrated into the healthcare design process, and provide a checklist for future implementation.

BACKGROUND

Design thinking is a collaborative method of inquiry that fosters innovative, team-generated solutions to complex scenarios, known as "wicked problems," that are extraordinarily difficult to solve. It is a practical tool in the toolbox of the codesign team, which includes the client and design professionals as primary stakeholders. It is powered by team-based creativity that adaptively responds to a need for new approaches and products in an innovative and practically applicable way. The need for design thinking in healthcare is steadily increasing as the healthcare system and its care environments continue to grow in complexity. Although major medical breakthroughs have undeniably expanded the average human life span, the current healthcare system is inefficient. Now, more than ever, design thinking and the innovative, human-centered solutions it enables are needed within healthcare design. Although the use of design thinking as a method within the field of architecture is not new, many design teams struggle integrating it fully within the design process, particularly in healthcare. The knowledge, design method, checklists, and direction provided in this article can benefit healthcare design teams to successfully integrate the method into practice.

CONCLUSION

If design thinking is integrated into the healthcare architectural design process with the creative problem-solving method, opportunities will arise for innovative solutions and deeper insights into problems to benefit healthcare delivery.