A Systematic Review of Research Gaps in the Built Environment of Inpatient Healthcare Settings

Author:

Elf Marie1ORCID,Lipson-Smith Ruby23ORCID,Kylén Maya14ORCID,Saa Juan Pablo25,Sturge Jodi6ORCID,Miedema Elke7,Nordin Susanna1,Bernhardt Julie2,Anåker Anna1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. School of Health and Welfare, Dalarna University, Falun, Sweden

2. The Florey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health, University of Melbourne, VIC, Australia

3. The MARCS Institute for Brain, Behaviour and Development, Western Sydney University, Westmead, NSW Australia

4. Department of Health Sciences, Lund University, Lund, Sweden

5. School of Allied Health, Human Services and Sport, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Melbourne, VIC, Australia

6. Department of Design, Production and Management, Faculty of Engineering Technology, University of Twente, The Netherlands

7. InHolland University of Applied Science, Domain Technology, Design and Computation, Division of Built Environment, The Netherlands

Abstract

Objective: This study utilized the evidence-gap map method and critically examined the scope, methodologies, and focus of the studies that investigated the influence of the built environment on inpatient healthcare settings over a decade (2010–2021). Methods: We conducted a systematic review per the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses guidelines and surveyed 406 articles, primarily from North America and Europe. Results: Our findings revealed a dominant focus on architectural features (73%), such as room design and ward layout. Comparatively, there was less emphasis on interior-, ambient-, social-, and nature-related features. Most previous studies explored multiple environmental features, which indicated the intricacy of this field. Research outcomes were diverse, with person-centered care (PCC) being the most frequently investigated, followed by safe care, emotional well-being, activity, and behavior. Furthermore, research methods varied considerably based on the study’s outcomes and features. Clinical outcomes and safe care favored quantitative methods, activity and behavior favored mixed methods, and PCC favored qualitative research. Conclusion: This review provides an in-depth overview of the existing studies on healthcare design research and sheds light on the current trends and methodological choices. The insights garnered can guide future research, policy-making, and the development of healthcare facilities.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Reference60 articles.

1. Design Quality in the Context of Healthcare Environments: A Scoping Review

2. The physical environment and multi-professional teamwork in three newly built stroke units

3. “It’s Lonely”: Patients’ Experiences of the Physical Environment at a Newly Built Stroke Unit

4. Why hospital design matters: A narrative review of built environments research relevant to stroke care

5. Brambilla A., Rebecchi A., Capolongo S. (2019). Evidence based hospital design. A literature review of the recent publications about the EBD impact of built environment on hospital occupants’ and organizational outcomes. Annali Di Igiene, 31(2), 165–180. https://doi:10.7416/ai.2019.2269

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3