Design bugs out: a real world investigation of hospital bedside chairs and commodes

This paper was presented at the the 17th World Congress on Ergonomics (IEA’09) in August 2009, Beijing, China.Healthcare Associated Infections (HCAIs) can affect both patients and healthcare workers. They are difficult to treat, and can complicate illnesses, cause distress, and even lead to death. HCAIs are also a huge financial burden on the UK’s National Health Service (NHS). Aiming to identify and fast-track the implementation of new technologies and design-led innovations to combat HCAIs, the UK’s Department of Health (DH), in partnership with the Purchasing and Supply Agency of the NHS and the Design Council, launched the Challenge ‘Design Bugs Out’ in September 2008. The design challenge invited teams of designers and manufacturers to redesign hospital furniture and equipment to make them easier to keep clean, and so help reduce patients’ exposure to HCAIs and improve their hospital experience. As a research partner of a winning team PearsonLloyd Design Consultancy and Kirton Healthcare Manufacturing) selected to answer this Challenge, the Human-Centred Design Institute (HCDI) at Brunel University conducted intensive design research focusing on bedside chairs and on-ward commodes. The research findings were used to inform the design process of the ward objects, towards the delivery of working prototypes in April 2009, to be displayed in a public exhibition and then taken on a national tour of selected hospitals for trial. This paper reports on the research process, aiming to extract useful information on a human-centred approach to healthcare design innovation.The Design Council, Department of Healt

Future bathroom: A study of user-centred design principles affecting usability, safety and satisfaction in bathrooms for people living with disabilities

Research and development work relating to assistive technology 2010-11 (Department of Health) Presented to Parliament pursuant to Section 22 of the Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act 197

What does it take to make integrated care work? A ‘cookbook’ for large-scale deployment of coordinated care and telehealth

The Advancing Care Coordination & Telehealth Deployment (ACT) Programme is the first to explore the organisational and structural processes needed to successfully implement care coordination and telehealth (CC&TH) services on a large scale. A number of insights and conclusions were identified by the ACT programme. These will prove useful and valuable in supporting the large-scale deployment of CC&TH. Targeted at populations of chronic patients and elderly people, these insights and conclusions are a useful benchmark for implementing and exchanging best practices across the EU. Examples are: Perceptions between managers, frontline staff and patients do not always match; Organisational structure does influence the views and experiences of patients: a dedicated contact person is considered both important and helpful; Successful patient adherence happens when staff are engaged; There is a willingness by patients to participate in healthcare programmes; Patients overestimate their level of knowledge and adherence behaviour; The responsibility for adherence must be shared between patients and health care providers; Awareness of the adherence concept is an important factor for adherence promotion; The ability to track the use of resources is a useful feature of a stratification strategy, however, current regional case finding tools are difficult to benchmark and evaluate; Data availability and homogeneity are the biggest challenges when evaluating the performance of the programmes

What do stroke survivors think about evidence based care they receive? Learning from insights at the periphery

Permission to archive the publisher pdf of this article was granted by the publisher in February 2012Rationale and aim of study: While exploring the experience of stroke survivors of secondary stroke prevention as part of a wider patient and public involvement service initiative, study participants willingly shared insights on other aspects of care that mattered to them. This is important as little is known about patients’ preferences for care. Methods: Data was generated from focus groups and semi-structured interviews that were held with 38 stroke survivors or their proxy respondents as part of an action research study. A framework analysis was used to examine data. Results: Our findings largely support current knowledge about the benefits of receiving evidence based stroke care. Although patients broadly appreciated being on a specialist unit, unexpectedly and contrary to best practice some expressed the wish to be treated elsewhere as they found the experience of being on a stroke unit difficult. Other findings included the need for more local peer support and difficulties surrounding transfer from hospital to home. Resultant actions included awareness training for staff about sensitively managing people’s perceptions about being on the stroke unit; development of shared computer based (IT) resources, and the establishment of a volunteer peer support system. Conclusion: The evidence base for the benefits of stroke unit care is unequivocal; however this model of care presents challenges for some. Involving patients in service development can inform small but key changes in practice that can help address inherent tensions in delivering evidence based services that are sensitive to patient preference.This project was funded by a grant from the Peninsula Primary Care Research Networ

Kent and Medway acute mental health services review

An independent analysis of the public response to a consultation on ‘achieving excellent care in a mental health crisis’ by the Centre for Nursing and Healthcare Research at the University of Greenwich. Background: This document presents the results of an analysis of the responses to the formal public consultation on Acute Mental Health Crisis Care services which took place over a 13 week period from 26 July 2012 to 26 October 2012. The consultation was conducted by NHS Kent and Medway working in partnership with Kent and Medway NHS and Social Care Partnership Trust, and the data gathered was analysed independently by the Centre for Nursing and Healthcare Research at the University of Greenwich

Building Firm Foundations Sure Start Mellow Valley Evaluation Report 2005/ 2006

This report forms the Year 3 annual report. Alongside documenting findings from Year 2 evaluation activities, this report also brings together findings from previous evaluation activities and gives wider consideration to the overall progress and outcomes of the programme so far. Section two explains the evaluation approach that has been adopted and details the activities that have been conducted and the methods used. Section 3 highlights the key themes and findings to emerge from the workshops undertaken with the Sure Start teams and provides a summary of the indepth evaluation conducted of the Family Support Team. Section 4 is entitled ‘Pulling it all together’ and considers the work and achievements of Sure Start Mellow Valley with particular regard to the five outcomes of Every Child Matters. A conclusion and brief summary of findings is found in Section 5 followed by a range of further information within the Section 6 Appendices

Alarm compliance in healthcare: Design considerations for actionable alarms (in intensive care units)

Intensive care units are technologically advanced environments that are designed to safeguard the patient while their vitals are stabilized for further treatment. Audible and visual alarms are part of the healthcare ecology. However, these alarms are so many that clinicians suffer from a syndrome called "alarm fatigue" and often do not comply with the task alarm is conveying. Measuring compliance with rules in the workspace and determining the success of a system belongs to the field of ergonomics and is based on data collected through task observations and scoring. In this paper, we will explore compliance with critical alarms by not only from their potential success or failure perspective but also from the perspectives of the clinician capacity, needs, and motivations to comply with alarms in critical environments. We will finally, reflect on further possible design strategies to increase compliance in critical care that are beyond following rules per se but through intrinsic motivation