Single-Room Ward Design and Its Impact on Service and Patient Outcomes: An Evaluation Study

Perspectives of Families and Healthcare Staff on the Design of Inpatient Hospital Rooms in Saudi Arabia

Aim: This study aims to explore the relationship between the perspectives of both family members and healthcare staff regarding the design of hospital inpatient rooms. It investigates the impact of family presence on the healing environment and examines the influence of specific design elements within inpatient rooms on the extent of family presence. Background: The positive impact of family presence in healthcare settings is rooted in the notion that patients and their families are significant stakeholders in the care process. However, little is known about the influence of inpatient room design elements on family presence in healthcare settings in the Middle East. Methods: A questionnaire survey was conducted among 359 participants, encompassing patients, family visitors, and healthcare professionals from three hospitals in Saudi Arabia. The questionnaire items sought insights into the influence of design elements within inpatient rooms on family presence and the overall healing environment. Results: The results indicate a strong preference for single-patient rooms (74.5%), natural light (77.6%), comfortable seating (85.8%), and a family zone positioned by the window for unobstructed views of nature (50.5%). Furthermore, the study reveals that family presence is perceived to have positive effects on the healing environment (84.0%), patient safety (81.3%), and satisfaction with the care process (88.0%). Conclusion: This study proposes a design model for inpatient rooms that can effectively cater to the needs of patients and their families, thereby contributing to the overall improvement of healthcare building design.

Clinical, humanistic and economic outcomes, including experiencing of patient safety events, associated with admitting patients to single rooms compared with shared accommodation for acute hospital admissions: a systematic review and narrative synthesis

OBJECTIVES

Assess the impact of single rooms versus multioccupancy accommodation on inpatient healthcare outcomes and processes.

DESIGN

Systematic review and narrative synthesis.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, Embase, Google Scholar and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence website up to 17 February 2022.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Eligible papers assessed the effect on inpatients staying in hospital of being assigned to a either a single room or shared accommodation, except where that assignment was for a direct clinical reason like preventing infection spread.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Data were extracted and synthesised narratively, according to the methods of Campbell et al. RESULTS: Of 4861 citations initially identified, 145 were judged to be relevant to this review. Five main method types were reported. All studies had methodological issues that potentially biased the results by not adjusting for confounding factors that are likely to have contributed to the outcomes. Ninety-two papers compared clinical outcomes for patients in single rooms versus shared accommodation. No clearly consistent conclusions could be drawn about overall benefits of single rooms. Single rooms were most likely to be associated with a small overall clinical benefit for the most severely ill patients, especially neonates in intensive care. Patients who preferred single rooms tended to do so for privacy and for reduced disturbances. By contrast, some groups were more likely to prefer shared accommodation to avoid loneliness. Greater costs associated with building single rooms were small and likely to be recouped over time by other efficiencies.

CONCLUSIONS

The lack of difference between inpatient accommodation types in a large number of studies suggests that there would be little effect on clinical outcomes, particularly in routine care. Patients in intensive care areas are most likely to benefit from single rooms. Most patients preferred single rooms for privacy and some preferred shared accommodation for avoiding loneliness.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42022311689.

Falls Incidence Compared Between a Multibedded Ward Hospital and a 100% Single-Occupancy Room Hospital: An Uncontrolled Before-After Study

BACKGROUND

Single-occupancy patient rooms in hospitals have become popular because of the privacy they offer. A downside, however, is the lack of social control from other patients, which might increase the risk of falls and undetected delirium.

AIM

To study whether the incidence of falls in single-occupancy patient rooms differs from that in multibedded patient rooms. Secondary aims were to establish differences in the context of falls and differences in delirium incidence.

METHODS

An uncontrolled observational before-after study was performed during 16 months before and 16 after moving to a hospital with 100% single-occupancy patient rooms. Fall data were retrieved from the hospital incident reporting system. The Delirium Observation Screening Scale (DOSS) was retrieved from the hospital electronic patient data system. Main outcomes were the number of falls per 1,000 patient days, assessed with a Poisson regression analysis, and delirium incidence in fallers.

RESULTS

The incidence of falls was not significantly different between the before period (1.39 falls/1,000 patient days) and the after period (1.38 falls/1,000 patient days; p = .924). In the after period, falls in the bathroom were significantly more frequent than in the before period, respectively, 17.2% and 9.4% (p = .003). In both periods, one quarter of the patients who fell had been assessed for delirium. In the before period, 57/73 (78%) of those were suspected for delirium (DOSS ≥ 3) versus 37/55 (67%) in the after period (p = .225).

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, we observed no change in incidence of falls after moving to a hospital with 100% single-occupancy bed rooms.

Patients' and Nurses' Experiences of All Single-Room Hospital Accommodation: A Scoping Review

AIM AND OBJECTIVE

To identify, examine, and map literature on the experiences of single-room hospital accommodation, exploring what is known about how single-room accommodation in hospitals is viewed by patients and nurses.

BACKGROUND

Worldwide, hospital design is changing to mainly single-room accommodation. However, there is little literature exploring patients' and nurses' experiences of single-room designs.

DESIGN

Scoping review following the Joanna Briggs Institute guidance on scoping reviews.

METHODS

We conducted the search in medical databases for scientific and gray literature. The four authors independently used a data extraction tool to include sources from the searches. The sources were discussed during the process, and in case of a disagreement between two reviewers, the third and fourth reviewer would be invited to participate in the discussion until consensus was achieved.

RESULTS

We included 22 sources published during the period 2002-2020, with a majority (n = 16) during the period 2013-2020. The sources were distributed on 10 different countries; however, England dominated with 14 publications. We found three main maps for reporting on patients' experiences: (1) personal control, (2) dignity, and (3) by myself. For the nurses' experiences, we found four main maps: (1) the working environment, (2) changes of nursing practice, (3) privacy and dignity, and (4) patient safety.

CONCLUSION

We suggested that patients' and nurses' experiences are predominantly interdependent and that the implications of single-room accommodation is a large and complex issue which goes beyond hospital design.