Paper Example on Designing Facilities for Optimal Healthcare: Stakeholder Perspectives

Introduction

When designing a facility, the needs of all stakeholders must be taken into consideration. In the healthcare industry, stakeholders are individuals who offer services to the patients both indirectly and directly (Wu et al. 2019). Stakeholders can vary from the janitor to the owners of the health facility. The perspective of a stakeholder during the design of a facility is essential since it enables designers to comprehend the requirements for the facility to be accessible, effective, and efficient. According to Kreindler (2017), patient flow is an essential element of process management in healthcare facilities. Overcrowding of hospitals and ineffective flow of patients affects the quality and timelessness of care and reduces patient satisfaction. When facilities are being designed, it is critical to consider cross points within the design space and compliance with FGI guidelines.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Role of the patient in the flow diagram

Stakeholders have separate roles within the flow diagram. Significance is placed on satisfying the needs and interests of stakeholders from participating in the design of the facility and the facility to be effective. When the patient is being attended to, the flow of the facility should be efficient for maneuver for both the patient and care providers. Care providers comprise physicians, nurses, and interdisciplinary team members. For instance, for physicians, placement of the doors is essential for workflow in addition to the quality care and safety of the patient. Each member of the care team must be capable of easily accessing the patient and the equipment required to care for the patient as well as discharge.

Space worked or did not work for each stakeholder

The primary stakeholder, in this case, is the patient; hence the surgical space was evaluated based on its effectiveness for the patient. The patient goes across the space through the patient entryway and heads to the prep-room where they stay input until they are taken into surgery. Post-surgery the patient uses the opposite post-op recovery space where they stay until they are discharged from the facility provided they are stable and have been cleared by the physician. The space is efficient for the patient, provided the patient goes through the first prep area, and is discharged from the second post-op area.

For the physician, the placement of the doors is essential for workflow and ensures quality care and safety of the patient. If doors are not located in appropriate areas, for example, when a physician exits directly from the scrub area into the surgical room, it may result in interference with the sterility of equipment (Verwilghen, 2018). The reason is that the surgeon has to take several steps from the scrub room via other entrances to access the operating room. The flow diagram indicates the care team as efficient access to patients, and the workflow is advantageous to all the stakeholders.

Do the cross points create hubs that could reduce foot traffic?

The main cross-points are found in the recovery and pre-op areas near the entrance and exit doors for patients. The other main cross-point is between the operating and recovery spaces, and the last cross-point is between the final recovery areas and the med gas spaces. The above spaces do not create a hub to minimize foot traffic since they allow for space for multiple care providers walking and ferrying patients to all connecting spaces until they are discharged.

Does the flow support the current build of the facility and FGI guidelines?

The flow of the facility complies with the FGI guidelines since spaces are allocated between every room for the patient to easily maneuver to the preceding step in the process (Singh & Lillrank, 2017). The surgery areas are sealed off to give patients sufficient space and anesthesia. Also, in this flow, areas that have restricted access, for instance, medical gas areas and scrub rooms, are not accessible. For any conventional surgery or recovery areas, it is essential to have the precise number of medical slots for patients before, during, and after surgery.

Improvement to support sustainable facility design & stakeholder flow

When designing a facility, the layout must satisfy the needs of patients and care providers. According to Alvaro et al. (2016), the structure of a facility, including the movable and fixed components, can have a major effect on human performance, particularly on the safety and health of patients, their families, and employees. For patients and staff, strategically designing the arrangement of patient rooms, waiting rooms, surgical areas, hallways, and lighting may affect their performance or recovery; hence a consistent layout is important to enhance patient outcomes and maximize employee outputs. Hence, an improvement to the flow of the facility is the provision of a consistent layout, which is beneficial to patients in two ways: patients can easily move and safely move and minimizes errors from caregivers. The layout of the facility may benefit from great continuity and an identical layout.

Steps to effect the improvements/alternative designs

According to Singh & Lillrank (2017), planning is crucial if the desire is to achieve a successful implementation. Successful implementation incorporates all the aspects of the project and is founded on the strategic vision of an organization. When implementing, it is vital to monitor the safety, cost, quality, patient satisfaction, and the needs of physicians. Communication between stakeholders and all team members is necessary. According to Suchomel (2016), the steps are as follows and cover any future needs of physicians, patients, community and employees: Constructions starts after approval licenses have been obtained; completion of the facility flow diagram and labeling all rooms; purchase imaging equipment, HVAC, computer system, generator and furnish the facility; acquire EHR system in addition to installations, acquire ten-year maintenance and a training plan. Finally, to ensure the parking lot has adequate parking spaces and indicate designated handicap slots. These changes would not happen in a fortnight and may take up to five years to fully implement.

Evaluation techniques

Evaluation can be done using analytical tools such as quantitative and qualitative analysis to gather the appropriate data for the evaluation of the project (Abildgaard et al. 2016). Qualitative tools gauge intangible elements, for example, satisfaction or awareness, which is important in determining the overall approval of the project. Conversely, quantitative tools

methods use objective measurements, and the statistical analysis of data collected is important to measure the resources and length required for the project to be completed to realize the expected outcome.

Data type required to evaluate the success

The type of data required to evaluate the success of the project is an overview of the project and the expectations that had been set for the project. Evaluating the progress of the project to identify whether it meets the expectations that had been set, such as completion date and ability to increase facility flow and patient satisfaction, then the project can be viewed as successful.

Conclusion

The use of a facility flow diagram to show how various stakeholders utilize the facility is important to ensure effective flow for all members of care providers, patients, and their families. The flow diagram helps in understanding the role of each stakeholder. The perspective of a patient on the design of a facility is essential in the healthcare business since quality and efficiency of care are most significant to patients.

References

Abildgaard, J. S., Saksvik, P. Ø., & Nielsen, K. (2016). How to measure the intervention process? An assessment of qualitative and quantitative approaches to data collection in the process evaluation of organizational interventions. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1380.

Alvaro, C., Wilkinson, A. J., Gallant, S. N., Kostovski, D., & Gardner, P. (2016). Evaluating intention and effect: The impact of healthcare facility design on patient and staff well-being. HERD: Health Environments Research & Design Journal, 9(2), 82-104.

Kreindler, S. A. (2017). Six ways not to improve patient flow: a qualitative study. BMJ quality & safety, 26(5), 388-394.

Singh, V. K., & Lillrank, P. (Eds.). (2017). Planning and designing healthcare facilities: a lean, innovative, and evidence-based approach. Taylor & Francis.

Suchomel, J. (2016, May 4, 2016). New thinking for hospital master plans: A changing health care environment requires a new approach to building. Healthcare Facility Management. Retrieved from https://www.hfmmagazine.com/articles/2177-new-thinking-for-hospitalmaster-plans

Verwilghen, D. (2018). Preparation for Surgery: Decision. Equine Surgery-E-Book, 143.

Wu, J., Wang, Y., Tao, L., & Peng, J. (2019). Stakeholders in the healthcare service ecosystem. Procedia CIRP, 83, 375-379.