This paper explores some of the premises of evidence-based design (EBD) and suggests that greater attention to and differentiation of the various purposes of research are needed, along with the development of an ecological theory that reflects the complexity of the health systems studied and more varied ways to communicate with and engage practitioners.
Background:
Problems with the American healthcare system are well known. For the past 20 years, an intervention that has gained increasing attention has been the physical design of healthcare facilities—hospitals in particular. EBD has been advocated as one means of using research to examine the relationship between design and healthcare to improve patient safety and the quality of care.
Conclusions:
The concept of integrated healthscape strategies is proposed to focus not only on research “evidence” and the methods used to collect and analyze it, but also on the different purposes research serves, the role of theory, and the use of EBD research in practice.
BarkerR. (1968). Ecological psychology.Palo Alto, CA.: Stanford University Press.
2.
BarkerR. (1987). Prospecting environmental psychology: Oskaloosa revisited. In StokolsD. & AltmanI. (Eds.), Handbook of environmental psychology, Vol. 2 (pp. 1413–1432). New York, NY: Wiley.
3.
BeckerF. (2004). Offices at work: Uncommon workspace strategies that add value and improve performance.San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
4.
BeckerF. (2007). The ecology of knowledge networks. California Management Review, 49(2), 1–20.
5.
BeckerF., & CartheyJ. (2007). Evidence-based design: Key issues in a collaborative process. Proceedings of the W092: Interdisciplinarity in the Built Environment Procurement Conference, September 23–26, Newcastle, Australia.
6.
BeckerF., & SteeleF. (1995). Workplace by design: Creating the high performance workscape.San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
7.
BonaiutoM.BilottaE., & StolfaA. (in press). Feng Shui and environmental psychology: A critical comparison. Journal of Architectural and Planning Research.
8.
BonnesM., & SecchiaroliG. (1995). Environmental psychology: A psycho-social introduction.London, United Kingdom: Sage.
9.
BronfenbrennerU. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
10.
CamaR. (2009). Evidence-based health care design.New York, NY: Wiley.
11.
CarpmanJ. R., & GrantM. A. (1993). Design that cares: Planning health facilities for patients and visitors.Chicago, IL: American Hospital Association.
12.
CarrollK.IedemaR., & KerridgeR. (2008). Reshaping ICU ward round practices using video reflexive ethnography. Qualitative Health Research, 18, 380–390.
13.
CookT. D., & CampbellD. T. (1979). Quasi-experimentation: Design and analysis issues for field settings.Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
14.
EvansG. W. (2003). A multidimensional analysis of cumulative risk and allostatic load among rural children. Developmental Psychology, 39, 924–933.
15.
EvansG. W., & McCoyJ. (1998). When buildings don't work: The role of architecture in human health. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 18(1), 85–94.
16.
HamiltonK. (2003). The four levels of evidence-based practice. Healthcare Design, November, 19–26.
17.
HamiltonK. H., & WatkinsD. H. (2008). Evidence-based design for multiple building types.New York, NY: Wiley.
18.
HartigT.BookA.GarvillJ.OlssonT., & GarlingT. (1995). Environmental influences on psychological restoration. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 37, 378–393.
19.
IedemaR.LongD.CarrollK.StenglinM., & BraithwaiteJ. (2006). Corridor work: How liminal space becomes a resource for handling complexities of multi-disciplinary health care. Paper presented at the Asia-Pacific Researchers in Organization Studies, 11th International Collequium, Melbourne, Australia.
20.
Institute of Medicine. (2001). Crossing the quality chasm: A new health system for the 21st century.Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
21.
JohnsonJ., & BarachP. (2006). Clinical microsystems in healthcare. In CarayonP. (Ed.), Handbook of human factors and ergonomics in healthcare and patient safety (pp. 95–106). New York, NY: CRC Press.
22.
KelleyT. (2002). The art of innovation.New York, NY: Harper Collins Business.
23.
Lavizzo-MoureyR. (2004). President's address. Annual report, Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. Princeton, NJ: Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.
24.
MarberryS. O. (2006). Improving healthcare with better building design.Chicago, IL: Health Administration Press.
25.
MohrJ. J.BataldenP., & BarachP. (2004). Integrating patient safety into the clinical microsystem. Quality and Safety in Health Care, 13(2), 34–38.
26.
SandelowskiM. (2000). Whatever happened to qualitative description?Research in Nursing & Health, 23, 334–340.
StephensP. A.BuskirkW. W.HaywardG. D., & Martinez Del RioC. (2005). Information theory and hypothesis testing: A call for pluralism. Journal of Applied Ecology, 42(1), 4–12.
29.
UlrichR. S. (1984). View through a window may influence recovery from surgery. Science, 224, 420–421.
30.
UlrichR. S.ZimringC.ZhuX.DuBoseJ.SeoH-B.ChoitY-S.JosephA. (2008). A review of the research literature on evidence-based healthcare design. Health Environments Research & Design Journal, 1(3), 61–121.
31.
UnderhillP. (1999). Why we buy: The science of shopping.New York, NY: Simon & Shuster.
32.
Van den BergA.KooleS. L., & Van der WulpN. Y. (2003). Environmental preference and restoration: How are they related?Journal of Environmental Psychology, 23, 135–146.
33.
VerderberS., & FineD. J. (2000). Healthcare architecture in an era of radical transformation.New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
34.
WandersmanA.DuffyJ.FlaspohlerP.NoonanR.LubellK.StillmanL.SaulJ. (2008). Bridging the gap between prevention research and practice: The interactive systems framework for dissemination and implementation. American Journal of Community Psychology, 41, 171–181.
35.
WinkelG.SaegertS., & EvansG. W. (2009). An ecological perspective on theory, methods, and analysis in environmental psychology: Advances and challenges. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29, 318–328.
36.
WoolfS. H. (2008). The meaning of translational research and why it matters. Journal of the American Medical Association, 299, 211–213.
