Rethinking healthcare building design quality: An evidence-based strategy

Mills, G R W; Phiri, M; Erskine, J and Price, A D F (2015) Rethinking healthcare building design quality: An evidence-based strategy. Building Research & Information, 43(4), pp. 499-515. ISSN 0961-3218

Abstract

Healthcare buildings play a significant role in delivering healthcare services and outcomes (e.g. quality, suitability, cleanliness, patient experience, value for money and risk mitigation). However, the current diffusion of responsibilities in England between central government and healthcare trusts has created gaps and weaknesses in the evidence base, knowledge, skills and tools for creating and assessing healthcare building design quality. How can a national healthcare building design quality improvement strategy be created? This question is explored in relation to policy, strategy and organizational issues. Four evaluation studies and four action research studies indicate the complexity and responsibilities in defining a design quality improvement strategy. It is found that the interdisciplinary development of national standards and tools requires centralized investment to facilitate nationwide learning and improvements in evidence and outcomes. In addition, the inevitable health policy changes made by successive governments require a sustainable and strategic response. The creation and maintenance of capacity and capabilities will require a dedicated team of professionals and a wide interdisciplinary network of long-term contributors who are motivated by a long-term desire to improve healthcare building design quality.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: assessment tools; design guidance; design quality; healthcare buildings; outcomes; public policy; quality assurance; standards; strategy
Index terms: value-for-money, complexity, organizational issue, risk mitigation, public policy, suitability, evidence, quality improvement, quality assurance, strategy, design quality, action research, building design, England
Subjects: professional practice, architectural design, project delivery, public policy, data collection methods, evaluation and assessment methods, business, design criteria, systems engineering, quality assurance, Geography, evaluation, financial risk, management
Topics: Governance, Cost Management, Business Strategy, Engineering Principles, Geographical Context, Research Practice, Organizational Design, Design Practice, Value Management, Quality Management
Descriptive scope: 4 PCEA

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