Geng, S; Chau, H W; Yan, S; Zhang, W and Zhang, C (2020) Comparative analysis of hospital environments in Australia and China using the space syntax approach. International Journal of Building Pathology and Adaptation, 39(3), pp. 525-546. ISSN 23984708
Abstract
Purpose: Spatial arrangement of hospital environments has been proven to have impacts on hospital users such as wayfinding, privacy and operational efficiency. Many studies examined the spatial quality of hospitals, but there is a lack of comparative research between Chinese and Australian hospitals. Hospitals in both countries have salient features that are worth to learn and can inform hospital stakeholders internationally on design decisions. The purpose of this paper is to evaluate and compare the spatial quality of hospitals from both countries using space syntax approach and field observation. Design/methodology/approach: This study uses space syntax analysis and observation to provide qualitative and quantitative data. Illustrative case studies from both countries are selected for comparison. The main benchmarks involved in measuring the spatial qualities, such as step depth and visual connectivity, are analysed using Depthmap X before comparing with the results from observation. Findings: For Chinese hospitals to be more human-centred, public space design and facility management need additional attention. Australian hospitals could learn from Hospital D on how to design highly centralised nursing stations that cope with a high patient flow. Global policy and decision-makers should consider the potential inconsistency between initial design intention and practical use. Originality/value: Practical implications were made based on the results for bettering hospital environments. It is hoped that the methodology presented in this research is of significance to the enhancement of global healthcare environment research.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | healthcare environment; hospital design; space syntax; spatial quality |
| Index terms: | design decision, China, privacy, public space, methodology, space syntax, comparative analysis, comparative research, connectivity, wayfinding, Australia, case study, efficiency |
| Subjects: | professional ethics, building performance, networking, urban design, Geography, urban design and public space, performance management, research methods, design practice, data analysis and analytics, research design and methodology, data collection methods |
| Topics: | Quality Management, Urban Studies, Digital Applications, Legal Issues, Design Practice, Research Practice, Geographical Context |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here