IntroductionApplying Design Thinking to health care could enhance innovation, efficiency, and effectiveness by increasing focus on patient and provider needs. The objective of this review is to determine how Design Thinking has been used in health care and whether it is effective.MethodsWe searched online databases (PubMed, Medline, Web of Science, CINAHL, and PyscINFO) for articles published through March 31, 2017, using the terms “health,” “health care,” or “healthcare”; and “Design Thinking,” “design science,” “design approach,” “user centered design,” or “human centered design.” Studies were included if they were written in English, were published in a peer-reviewed journal, provided outcome data on a health-related intervention, and used Design Thinking in intervention development, implementation, or both. Data were collected on target users, health conditions, intervention, Design Thinking approach, study design or sample, and health outcomes. Studies were categorized as being successful (all outcomes improved), having mixed success (at least one outcome improved), or being not successful (no outcomes improved).ResultsTwenty-four studies using Design Thinking were included across 19 physical health conditions, 2 mental health conditions, and 3 systems processes. Twelve were successful, 11 reported mixed success, and one was not successful. All 4 studies comparing Design Thinking interventions to traditional interventions showed greater satisfaction, usability, and effectiveness.ConclusionDesign Thinking is being used in varied health care settings and conditions, although application varies. Design Thinking may result in usable, acceptable, and effective interventions, although there are methodological and quality limitations. More research is needed, including studies to isolate critical components of Design Thinking and compare Design Thinking–based interventions with traditionally developed interventions.

Childhood obesity is associated with increased medical and psychosocial consequences and mortality and effective interventions are urgently needed. Effective interventions are urgently needed. This article reviews the evidence for psychological treatments of overweight and obesity in child and adolescent populations. Studies were identified through searches of online databases and reference sections of relevant review articles and metaanalyses. Treatment efficacy was assessed using established criteria, and treatments were categorized as well-established, probably efficacious, possibly efficacious, experimental, or of questionable efficacy. Well-established treatments included family-based behavioral treatment (FBT) and Parent-Only Behavioral Treatment for children. Possibly efficacious treatments include Parent-Only Behavioral Treatment for adolescents, FBT-Guided SelfHelp for children, and Behavioral Weight Loss treatment with family involvement for toddlers, children, and adolescents. Appetite awareness training and regulation of cues treatments are considered experimental. No treatments are considered probably efficacious, or of questionable efficacy. All treatments considered efficacious are multicomponent interventions that include dietary and physical activity modifications and utilize behavioral strategies. Treatment is optimized if family members are specifically targeted in treatment. Research supports the use of multicomponent lifestyle interventions, with FBT and Parent-Only Behavioral Treatment being the most widely supported treatment types. Additional research is needed to test a stepped care model for treatment and to establish the ideal dosage (i.e., number and length of sessions), duration, and intensity of treatments for long-term sustainability of healthy weight management. To improve access to care, the optimal methods to enhance the scalability and implementability of treatments into community and clinical settings need to be established.

To be successful at self-regulation, individuals must be able to resist impulses and desires. The strength model of self-regulation suggests that when self-regulatory capacity is depleted, self-control deficits result from a failure to engage top-down control mechanisms. Using functional neuroimaging, we examined changes in brain activity in response to viewing desirable foods among thirty-one chronic dieters, half of whom underwent self-regulatory depletion using a sequential task paradigm. Compared to non-depleted dieters, depleted dieters exhibited greater food cue-related activity in the orbitofrontal cortex, a brain area associated with coding the reward value and liking aspects of desirable foods and also showed decreased functional connectivity between this area and the inferior frontal gyrus, a region commonly implicated in self-control. These findings suggest that self-regulatory depletion provokes self-control failure by reducing connectivity between brain regions involved in cognitive control and those representing rewards thereby decreasing the capacity to resist temptations.