An audit of the content and quality in briefs for Swedish healthcare spaces

Abstract

PurposeInitial briefs (programs) were examined in order to obtain an overview of current practice in documenting the briefing process for new health care buildings in Sweden.Design/methodology/approachAn audit instrument was developed and used to examine briefs for the content and quality of information and to determine whether and to what extent the information was comprehensive and patient‐oriented.FindingsThe results indicate that few strategic briefs make use of evidence to support their statements. Moreover, few briefs had an explicitly patient‐focused goal for the project or measurable outcomes.Originality/valueThis new audit approach can be applied in various organisations and over time to improve the briefing process and create clearer goals and guidelines.

Shared decision making in designing new healthcare environments—time to begin improving quality

“…At present, however, spatial issues, such as the number of rooms and square meters, typically remain the focus during traditional early planning stages rather than trying to correlate users’ needs and outcomes. Research has also revealed deficiencies in the quality of the planning process with respect to focusing on the needs of users (person-orientation) and clarifying patient-related outcome measures for subsequent evaluation of the actual building or facility [ 29 , 47 , 51 , 52 ].…”

“…Although a poor end result of the program may indicate that the planning process was low quality, few authors have attempted to review the information in the programs. Elf and Malmqvist [ 51 ] conducted a review of the information in programs created for the HCE planning process and showed that only a few programs had explicit patient-focused goals for the project, measurable outcomes or references to new evidence. Fewer than half of the programs reviewed involved a clear description of the organization’s objectives and the activities that would occur in the planned care environment.…”

Development of the Content and Quality in Briefs Instrument (CQB-I)

“…Because the significant end user of healthcare environments is the patient and the overall goal is her or his well-being and health, information about the goal of patient care and the significant care processes (activities) and spatial factors needed for care should make up a considerable part of the design process and the developed brief (Curtis, Gesler, Priebe, & Francis, 2009;Gesler et al, 2004;Ulrich et al, 2004;Vischer, 2008). Although a recent study shows that briefs seldom contain an explicit patient perspective, healthcare professionals nevertheless are usually included on the design team along with building planners and architects (Elf & Malmqvist, 2009). Despite many regulations and normative recommendations regarding what information should be included in briefs (Barrett & Baldery, 2003;Blyth & Worthington, 2001;Fristedt & Ryd, 2004;The National Board of Housing, 2008;RIBA, n.d.), research shows an increasing need for improvement of the content as well as structure of briefs to ensure that users' needs and requirements are expressed (Bogers et al, 2008).…”

“…The prototype CQB-I was based partly on a studyspecific instrument developed by Elf & Malmqvist (2009). In developing the instrument, a review of relevant literature in the healthcare sciences, briefing, and architecture was carried out.…”

Valuing Indoor Air Quality Benefits in a Healthcare Construction Project with Real Option Analysis

“…In spite of this, the willingness of tenants to pay extra rent for better IAQ and the willingness of building owners to invest in IAQ is still low particularly in the public sector. Moreover, it is exceptional that building investment feasibility studies and project briefs contain quantitative analysis or measurable targets for life-cycle economic benefits and costs of IAQ [8,9]. As a matter of fact, potential economic benefits are not typically considered.…”