How Should Organizations Be Held Accountable for Promoting Environments That Foster Social Connection?

Growing familiarity with health risks of loneliness and isolation underscores the importance of social connection in patients' lived environments and communities. Deficits in social connection are linked to poor cognitive, mental, and physical health and premature death. Design interventions for physical environments-structures, spaces, and soundscapes, for example-can foster social connection, support, and resilience. This article canvasses urban interventions that can support human health investment and development. This article also suggests that designers of community policies, programs, structures, and spaces should be accountable for promoting social connection to help generate measurable health outcomes, such as longevity.

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

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.

Destination bedside: using research findings to visualize optimal unit layouts and health information technology in support of bedside care.

This study explored the impact of unit design and healthcare information technology (HIT) on nursing workflow and patient-centered care (PCC). Healthcare information technology and unit layout-related predictors of nursing workflow and PCC were measured during a 3-phase study involving questionnaires and work sampling methods. Stepwise multiple linear regressions demonstrated several HIT and unit layout-related factors that impact nursing workflow and PCC.

An evaluation of operating room safety and efficiency: pilot utilization of a structured focus group format and three-dimensional video mock-up to inform design decision.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this investigation was to identify safety and efficiency-related design features for inclusion in operating room (OR) construction documents. BACKGROUND: Organizations are confronted with an array of challenges when planning an OR, including inefficiencies in operations, adverse events, and a variety of innovations to choose from. Currently, techniques that can be used in design practice and to inform design decision making for implementable OR solutions are limited. METHODS: The project team used a structured focus group format with mixed methods to solicit 19 varying surgical team members' reactions to a three-dimensional video mock-up of a proposed OR. Data from the 19 participants were analyzed using stepwise multiple regression and content analysis of open-ended responses. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Results demonstrate that several features of the proposed OR design predict meaningful outcomes, including flexibility and satisfaction with the OR setup, adverse event prevention, team performance, and distractions and interruptions. Participants' suggested solutions include universal booms to support anesthetic and perfusion capabilities, a fixed circulating nursing workstation that faces the patient and is at the foot of the operating room table, a wall-mounted monitor across from the surgeon, and wiring to support a touch-screen control arm in OR surgical fields. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from structured focus groups with mixed methods lead to implementable design solutions for construction documentation. The expeditious qualities and objectivity of the format are value-adds to the design decision-making process. Future research should use various techniques such as virtual technologies and building information modeling.