Purpose – As hospitals are now being designed with an increasing number of single rooms or cubicles, the individual preference of patients with respect to social contact is of great interest. The purpose of this study is to gain a better understanding of the experience of patients in an outpatient infusion center.Design/methodology/approach – A total of 29 semi-structured interviews were conducted, transcribed and analyzed by using direct content analysis.Findings – Findings showed that patients perceived a lack of acoustic privacy and therefore tried to emotionally isolate themselves or withheld information from staff. In addition, patients complained about the sounds of infusion pumps, but they were neutral about the interior features. Patients who preferred non-talking desired enclosed private rooms and perceived negative distraction because ofspatial crowding. In contrast, patients who preferred talking, or had no preference, desired shared rooms and perceived positive distraction because of spatial crowding.Research limitations/implications – In conclusion, results showed a relation between physical aspects (i.e. physical enclosure) and the social environment.Practical implications – The findings allow facility managers to better understand the patients’ experiences in an outpatient infusion facility and to make better-informed decisions. Patients with different preferences desired different physical aspects. Therefore, nursing staff of outpatient infusion centers should assess the preferences of patients. Moreover, architects should integrate different typesof treatment places (i.e. enclosed private rooms and shared rooms) in new outpatient infusion centers to fulfill different preferences and patients should have the opportunity to discuss issues in private with nursing staff.Originality/value – This study emphasizes the importance of a mix of treatment rooms, while new hospital designs mainly include single rooms or cubicles.
LINK
Noise is a common problem in hospitals, and it is known that social behavior can influence sound levels. The aim of this naturally-occurring field experiment was to assess the influence of a non-talking rule on the actual sound level and perception of patients in an outpatient infusion center. In a quasi-randomized trial two conditions were compared in real life. In the control condition, patients (n = 137) were allowed to talk to fellow patients and visitors during the treatment. In the intervention condition patients (n = 126) were requested not to talk to fellow patients and visitors during their treatment. This study measured the actual sound levels in dB(A) as well as patients’ preferences regarding sound and their perceptions of the physical environment, anxiety, and quality of health care. A linear-mixed-model showed a statistically significant, but rather small reduction of the non-talking rule on the actual sound level with an average of 1.1 dB(A). Half of the patients preferred a talking condition (57%), around one-third of the patients had no preference (36%), and 7% of the patients preferred a non-talking condition. Our results suggest that patients who preferred non-talking, perceived the environment more negatively compared to the majority of patients and perceived higher levels of anxiety. Results showed no significant effect of the experimental conditions on patient perceptions. In conclusion, a non-talking rule of conduct only minimally reduced the actual sound level and did not influence the perception of patients.
LINK
Previous research shows that automatic tendency to approach alcohol plays a causal role in problematic alcohol use and can be retrained by Approach Bias Modification (ApBM). ApBM has been shown to be effective for patients diagnosed with alcohol use disorder (AUD) in inpatient treatment. This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of adding an online ApBM to treatment as usual (TAU) in an outpatient setting compared to receiving TAU with an online placebo training. 139 AUD patients receiving face-to-face or online treatment as usual (TAU) participated in the study. The patients were randomized to an active or placebo version of 8 sessions of online ApBM over a 5-week period. The weekly consumed standard units of alcohol (primary outcome) was measured at pre-and post-training, 3 and 6 months follow-up. Approach tendency was measured pre-and-post ApBM training. No additional effect of ApBM was found on alcohol intake, nor other outcomes such as craving, depression, anxiety, or stress. A significant reduction of the alcohol approach bias was found. This research showed that approach bias retraining in AUD patients in an outpatient treatment setting reduces the tendency to approach alcohol, but this training effect does not translate into a significant difference in alcohol reduction between groups. Explanations for the lack of effects of ApBM on alcohol consumption are treatment goal and severity of AUD. Future ApBM research should target outpatients with an abstinence goal and offer alternative, more user-friendly modes of delivering ApBM training.
MULTIFILE
