Population health and medicine: Policy and financial drivers

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.

LAGOS: learning health systems and how they can integrate with patient care

PROBLEM

Learning health systems (LHS) are an underexplored concept. How LHS will operate in clinical practice is not well understood. This paper investigates the relationships between LHS, clinical care process specifications (CCPS) and the established levels of medical practice to enable LHS integration into daily healthcare practice.

METHODS

Concept analysis and thematic analysis were used to develop an LHS characterisation. Pathway theory was used to create a framework by relating LHS, CCPS, health information systems and the levels of medical practice. A case study approach evaluates the framework in an established health informatics project.

RESULTS

Five concepts were identified and used to define the LHS learning cycle. A framework was developed with five pathways, each having three levels of practice specificity spanning population to precision medicine. The framework was evaluated through application to case studies not previously understood to be LHS.

DISCUSSION

Clinicians show limited understanding of LHS, increasing resistance and limiting adoption and integration into care routine. Evaluation of the presented framework demonstrates that its use enables: (1) correct analysis and characterisation of LHS; (2) alignment and integration into the healthcare conceptual setting; (3) identification of the degree and level of patient application; and (4) impact on the overall healthcare system.

CONCLUSION

This paper contributes a theoretical framework for analysis, characterisation and use of LHS. The framework allows clinicians and informaticians to correctly identify, characterise and integrate LHS within their daily routine. The overall contribution improves understanding, practice and evaluation of the LHS application in healthcare.