Enhancing Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation Success: The Crucial Role of Architectural Design in Transplant Units and Hematology Departments

By /
Cite this article Download PDF DOI Email Share
Halit Coza, Başak Ünver Koluman

Volume 7 · Issue 3 · pp. 179–185

Received: 20240815  Accepted: 20240906  Published: 20240930

Abstract

Aim: This paper aims to explore the critical role of architectural design in Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation (HSCT) procedures, focusing on how various aspects of design influence patient outcomes, staff efficiency, infection control, and overall safety. The study seeks to understand how the physical environment impacts both the immediate and long-term recovery of patients undergoing HSCT and to advocate for design principles that enhance patient and caregiver experiences. Discussion: Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation (HSCT) has emerged as a vital therapeutic modality for a diverse spectrum of hematological disorders and malignancies. As medical and technological advancements continue to evolve, the significance of the physical environment in which HSCT procedures are conducted becomes increasingly evident. This paper delves into how architectural design affects patient well-being, staff efficiency, and infection control, emphasizing the importance of creating environments that support psychological well-being. It examines the impact of design on infection prevention, safety during emergencies, and the overall efficiency of healthcare delivery. The discussion also highlights the role of sustainability and green design principles in minimizing the environmental footprint while promoting patient recovery. Conclusions: The paper concludes that architectural design plays a transformative role in enhancing patient experiences and healthcare outcomes in HSCT settings. It underscores the need for a patient-centric approach to design that integrates wellness-focused elements and advanced technology. The study advocates for a collaborative effort among healthcare institutions, architects, designers, and policymakers to create supportive, efficient, and sustainable healthcare environments. By prioritizing these design considerations, healthcare environments can significantly improve the HSCT journey and contribute to the broader realm of healthcare excellence.

Keywords: Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation, Architectural Design, Healthcare Environment, Patient-Centered Care, Sustainability in Healthcare

Introduction

Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) has emerged as a pivotal therapeutic intervention in the management of various hematological disorders and malignancies. Over the past few decades, significant strides in medical science and technology have elevated the success rates of HSCT, transforming it into a life-saving procedure for countless patients.1,2 While medical advancements continue to be at the forefront of improving patient outcomes, this

Corresponding Author: Halit Coza, hcoza@pau.edu.tr, Received: 15.08.2024, Accepted: 06.09.2024, Available Online Date: 27.09.2024 Cite this article as: Coza H, Unver Koluman B. Enhancing Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation Success: The Crucial Role of Architectural Design in Transplant Units and Hematology Departments. J Cukurova Anesth Surg. 2024; 7(3): 179-85. https://doi.org/10.36516/jocass.1533945 Copyright © 2024 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CC-BY-NC-ND), where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal.

manuscript aims to shed light on a rather underexplored dimension of HSCT – the architectural design of the facilities where these crucial procedures take place.3

In the realm of healthcare, architectural design has traditionally played a subsidiary role, often overshadowed by the prominence of clinical expertise and technological innovation.4 However, as the landscape of modern medicine evolves, so does our understanding of the multifaceted factors that influence patient care. One such factor, which has gained recognition in recent years, is the physical environment in which healthcare interventions occur. In the context of HSCT, the architectural design of transplant units and hematology departments emerges as a critical determinant of treatment success and overall healthcare quality.5,6

Historically, healthcare architecture has primarily focused on functional aspects, such as efficient space utilization and adherence to regulatory standards. While these considerations are undeniably important, they only scratch the surface of what a well-thought-out architectural design can offer.7-9 This review ventures into the intricate interplay between architectural design and the intricate dynamics of HSCT, illustrating how it extends beyond mere aesthetics and convenience to significantly impact patient outcomes, staff efficiency, infection control, and, ultimately, the overall quality of healthcare delivery.

The overarching objective of this exploration is to underscore the pivotal role that architectural design plays within the realm of HSCT. It is a call to recognize the intricate synergy between medical science and the physical spaces where it is practiced. By delving into the nuances of design, this manuscript seeks to provide invaluable insights into creating environments that are not merely functional but supportive of the holistic well-being of patients and healthcare professionals alike. Ultimately, our aim is to contribute to the collective endeavor of refining transplantation outcomes and elevating the standard of care provided in the challenging field of hematopoietic cell transplantation.

Patient-Centered Design

In the domain of healthcare, the concept of patient-centered care has become a guiding principle, emphasizing the importance of tailoring medical services to meet individual patient needs.10 In this context, architectural design takes on a pivotal role in facilitating patient-centered care within HSCT units and hematology departments.11,12 This section delves into the intricate facets of patient-centered design, highlighting its profound impact on patient well-being and, consequently, treatment outcomes.

2.1. Designing Patient Rooms for Comfort and Psychological Well-being

The patient room is the primary focus of the patient's experience within a healthcare facility.13 As such, its design should prioritize patient comfort and psychological well-being. Considerations extend beyond mere functionality; they encompass creating an environment that fosters a sense of security, reduces anxiety, and promotes optimism during the often-arduous journey of HSCT.14-17

Patient rooms should be spacious, allowing for ease of movement for both patients and healthcare providers. Adequate space also accommodates the presence of family members, a crucial source of emotional support during the transplantation process. Moreover, ergonomic furniture and furnishings that prioritize patient comfort are essential. These elements contribute not only to physical comfort but also to a sense of normalcy in an otherwise clinical setting.18

The design should also embrace elements that evoke a sense of normalcy and homeliness. Personalization options, such as space for personal belongings and artwork, can significantly enhance the patient's sense of control and identity within the sterile hospital environment.19 Additionally, the arrangement of furniture and the inclusion of spaces for relaxation contribute to an environment conducive to emotional healing and recovery.20,21

2.2. The Importance of Natural Light, Views, and Privacy

Natural light has been shown to have a profound impact on patient outcomes. It can positively influence mood, circadian rhythms, and overall well-being. Hence, patient rooms should be designed to maximize access to natural light. Large windows, strategically placed to provide both privacy and views of nature, can significantly enhance the patient’s experience. Ensuring that patients have the option to control the amount of light in their rooms through window treatments adds an extra layer of patient-centeredness. Privacy, another critical consideration, must be carefully balanced with the desire for natural light and views. Ensuring that patients have a private space where they can receive visitors and engage in confidential discussions with healthcare providers is essential. Thus, thoughtful design should provide for both privacy and connection to the outside world.22-24

2.3. Ergonomic Considerations for Patient Mobility and Rehabilitation Spaces

The architectural design of HSCT units and hematology departments should extend its patient-centered focus to include ergonomic considerations. Patients undergoing HSCT often face physical challenges, including fatigue and reduced mobility. In response, the layout of patient rooms and common areas should prioritize accessibility, with attention to features such as grab bars, non-slip flooring, and easily accessible amenities. Rehabilitation spaces, both within patient rooms and communal areas, are vital for supporting patients' physical recovery. These spaces should be equipped with appropriate exercise equipment and aids, facilitating the rehabilitation process. Additionally, their design should promote safety and ease of use, ensuring that patients can engage in exercises independently or with the guidance of healthcare professionals.25,26

It should be taken into account that patient-centered design within HSCT units and hematology departments extends beyond aesthetics; it is a fundamental component of patient care. Prioritizing patient comfort, psychological well-being, access to natural light, privacy, and ergonomic considerations not only enhances the patient experience but also contributes to better treatment outcomes. Section 2 highlights the crucial role of architectural design in creating environments that foster patient-centered care in the context of hematopoietic cell transplantation.

Infection Control and Cleanliness

In the realm of healthcare, where patient well-being and recovery hinge on the management of complex diseases, the role of architectural design extends beyond aesthetics and comfort. Section 3 delves into the critical domain of infection control and cleanliness within HSCT units and hematology departments. These settings demand rigorous measures to mitigate the risk of infection, and the architectural design plays a pivotal role in achieving this objective.

3.1. The Impact of Air Quality and Ventilation Systems

Effective infection control begins with the management of air quality within healthcare facilities.27 In HSCT units and hematology departments, the immunocompromised status of many patients heightens their vulnerability to airborne pathogens. Consequently, meticulous attention to air quality and ventilation systems is paramount. Architectural design should prioritize the installation of high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filtration systems.28 These systems effectively remove airborne particles, including microorganisms, thus reducing the risk of cross-contamination. The strategic placement of air supply and exhaust vents, along with proper airflow direction, can further optimize air quality within patient rooms and common areas.29-31

3.2. Materials and Surfaces that Facilitate Effective Sanitation

Infection control extends beyond the air to encompass surfaces and materials within healthcare environments. The choice of materials should prioritize those that are easy to clean and resistant to harboring pathogens. Non-porous surfaces, such as stainless steel and laminates, are preferred for countertops and furniture, as they can be readily disinfected. Additionally, the design should minimize the presence of crevices, seams, and other areas where microbes can accumulate and proliferate. Seamless surfaces and well-sealed joints not only enhance sanitation efforts but also simplify maintenance procedures, ultimately contributing to a safer and cleaner environment.32-34

3.3. Spatial Planning to Reduce the Risk of Cross-Contamination

Spatial planning within HSCT units and hematology departments plays a pivotal role in infection control. The layout of patient rooms, common areas, and workflow pathways should be meticulously designed to minimize the risk of cross-contamination. This includes the strategic separation of potentially infectious zones from clean areas. The architectural design should incorporate principles of zoning, with clear demarcations between high-risk and low-risk areas.35 Moreover, the placement of hand hygiene stations and personal protective equipment (PPE) dispensers should be well-distributed, ensuring ready access for both patients and healthcare providers.36 Such considerations foster adherence to infection control protocols, reducing the likelihood of transmission.

In conclusion, the indispensable role of architectural design in infection control and cleanliness within HSCT units and hematology departments. The meticulous design of air quality systems, the selection of appropriate materials, and spatial planning that mitigates the risk of cross-contamination are fundamental elements in safeguarding the health and well-being of both patients and healthcare providers.37,38 By prioritizing these aspects, healthcare facilities can create environments that are conducive to the delivery of safe and effective care, particularly for patients undergoing hematopoietic cell transplantation.

Workflow Efficiency

Efficiency in healthcare delivery is a cardinal principle that resonates throughout the medical field. Within the context of HSCT units and hematology, radiology, interventional radiology departments, laboratory for blood tests and microbiology, blood bank and intensive care unit39, this principle takes on heightened significance, given the complexity of care required and the imperative for timely interventions. Section 4 examines the pivotal role of architectural design in enhancing workflow efficiency, thereby optimizing patient care and improving overall healthcare quality.

4.1. Streamlining the Patient Journey Within the Department

Patient care within HSCT units and hematology and the other departments involves a coordinated and multifaceted journey that spans diagnostics, treatment, monitoring, and recovery.40 The architectural design of these departments should prioritize the streamlining of this patient journey. This entails careful attention to the layout of spaces and their interconnections. Efficient spatial planning should minimize patient travel distances, reducing the potential for delays in care. Furthermore, the design should facilitate the logical progression of steps in the patient’s journey, ensuring that patients move seamlessly from one phase of care to another. This not only enhances patient experience but also contributes to more timely interventions and better clinical outcomes.

4.2. Ensuring Easy Access to Critical Equipment and Supplies

Accessibility to critical equipment and supplies is foundational to efficient healthcare delivery. Within HSCT units and hematology departments, where precise and often rapid interventions are required, the architectural design should ensure easy access to these essentials. Strategically positioned supply storage areas and equipment hubs can expedite care delivery. Furthermore, the design should consider the proximity of patient rooms to supply and equipment storage, minimizing the time spent retrieving necessary items. This not only optimizes workflow but also enhances staff productivity, allowing healthcare providers to allocate more time to direct patient care.41-43

4.3. Staff Workstations and Their Influence on Communication and Collaboration

The architectural design should also prioritize staff workstations as hubs of communication and collaboration. Effective teamwork among healthcare providers is vital for delivering high-quality care within HSCT units and hematology departments. Workstations should be strategically positioned to foster communication and information sharing.44,45 Considerations should include ergonomic workstation design, enabling staff to access patient information, communicate with colleagues, and coordinate care efficiently. Additionally, technology integration, such as electronic health record systems, should be seamlessly incorporated into the design to enhance data accessibility and facilitate real-time decision-making.46

In summary, the paramount importance of workflow efficiency within HSCT units and hematology and the other departments elucidates the role of architectural design in achieving this goal. Streamlining the patient journey, ensuring easy access to essential resources, and fostering effective communication and collaboration are pivotal aspects of architectural design that contribute not only to the optimization of care delivery but also to the enhancement of patient outcomes45. By embracing these principles, healthcare facilities can create environments that support the seamless provision of care for patients undergoing hematopoietic cell transplantation.

Safety and Emergency Preparedness

The safety of patients and healthcare providers is a paramount concern within HSCT units and hematology departments. These settings often deal with vulnerable patient populations, making preparedness for emergencies a critical imperative.47-49 Section 5 delves into the role of architectural design in enhancing safety and emergency preparedness, highlighting design features and considerations that contribute to a secure healthcare environment.

Patient and staff safety is the foundation upon which quality healthcare is built. Architectural design plays a pivotal role in incorporating features that enhance safety within HSCT units and hematology departments. One essential aspect is the minimization of physical hazards. Flooring materials should be slip-resistant to prevent falls, and corridors should be designed to accommodate the safe passage of beds and equipment. Furthermore, the design should minimize sharp edges and protrusions that could pose risks to patients and staff.50 This focus on safety extends to fixtures and furnishings within patient rooms, where the selection of appropriate materials can reduce the risk of injuries.

In the event of an emergency, rapid and safe evacuation is paramount. Architectural design should incorporate clear and well-marked evacuation routes, ensuring that patients and staff can exit the premises swiftly and safely. This includes the provision of accessible ramps and elevators for patients with mobility challenges. Additionally, the design should consider the location of emergency exits in relation to patient rooms and common areas. These exits should be strategically placed to minimize travel distances in the event of an evacuation, thus optimizing safety during high-stress situations.

The integration of technology is indispensable in modern healthcare settings, particularly in enhancing safety and emergency response. Architectural design should encompass the installation of advanced technology systems that support rapid response and crisis management. These systems may include fire alarms, smoke detectors, and automated notification systems that alert staff in case of emergencies. Video surveillance and access control systems can further enhance security within the facility. The seamless integration of these technologies into the architectural design ensures that safety measures are not only effective but also unobtrusive, preserving the healing environment.

It can be said that the pivotal role of architectural design in ensuring safety and emergency preparedness within HSCT units and hematology departments. Design features that enhance patient and staff safety, well-planned evacuation routes, and the integration of advanced technology collectively contribute to a healthcare environment that is resilient in the face of unexpected challenges. By prioritizing these aspects, healthcare facilities can uphold their commitment to safeguarding the well-being of all individuals within their care, even in the most demanding of circumstances.

Psychological Support and Well-Being

In the complex and often emotionally challenging world of HSCT units and hematology departments, the importance of psychological support and well-being cannot be overstated. Section 6 explores the role of architectural design in fostering psychological support and well-being for patients and their caregivers. This section delves into the profound impact of design on reducing stress, promoting healing, and enhancing the overall quality of care. The experience of undergoing HSCT is fraught with physical and emotional challenges, not only for patients but also for their caregivers.51-54 Architectural design can significantly contribute to stress reduction by creating environments that exude tranquility and comfort. Patient rooms should be designed with an understanding of the emotional needs of patients and their families. Thoughtful incorporation of soothing colors, artwork, and nature elements can create a calming ambiance. Acoustic considerations, such as soundproofing and noise reduction, further promote a peaceful environment. Waiting areas and communal spaces should also be designed with stress reduction in mind. Comfortable seating, access to natural light, and aesthetically pleasing surroundings can alleviate anxiety and foster a sense of well-being for both patients and caregivers.

Psychological well-being thrives in environments that offer spaces for relaxation, meditation, and emotional support.55 Architectural design should allocate areas within HSCT units and hematology departments for these purposes. Quiet rooms or meditation spaces can provide patients and caregivers with a refuge for solitude and reflection. Such spaces should be designed with tranquility in mind, incorporating elements like soft lighting56,57, comfortable seating, and minimal distractions. In addition to individual spaces, support groups, and therapeutic interventions are essential. These spaces should be flexible in design, accommodating various activities while maintaining a sense of warmth and comfort.

The integration of art and nature elements into architectural design can be a powerful tool for enhancing psychological well-being. Artwork, whether in the form of paintings, sculptures, or installations, can serve as a source of inspiration and distraction during challenging times. Nature elements, such as indoor gardens or views of green spaces, bring the healing power of the outdoors into the healthcare environment.58 Biophilic design principles, which connect people with nature through design, can have a profound impact on reducing stress and promoting emotional well-being. In conclusion, the crucial role of architectural design in providing psychological support and well-being within HSCT units and hematology departments. By creating environments that reduce stress, offer spaces for relaxation and emotional support, and incorporate art and nature elements, healthcare facilities can significantly enhance the overall experience of patients and caregivers.59,60 These design considerations not only contribute to improved mental health but also complement the clinical care provided, ultimately fostering a holistic approach to patient well-being in the context of hematopoietic cell transplantation.

Sustainability and Green Design

In today's healthcare landscape, the integration of sustainable and green design principles is no longer a mere trend but a pressing necessity. Section 7 delves into the significance of sustainability within HSCT units and hematology departments, elucidating the profound implications of architectural design on environmental responsibility and patient well-being. The healthcare sector, including HSCT units and hematology departments, is a significant contributor to environmental impacts, such as energy consumption, waste generation, and resource depletion. Recognizing this, healthcare facilities are increasingly embracing sustainable practices to mitigate their environmental footprint. Architectural design is a pivotal aspect of this endeavor. Sustainable healthcare design not only reduces negative environmental effects but also aligns with the ethical and social responsibilities of healthcare organizations.61-64 By reducing energy consumption, conserving resources, and minimizing waste generation, green design promotes environmental stewardship while also contributing to cost savings.

The choice of building materials and energy systems holds immense potential for sustainability within healthcare facilities. Architectural design should prioritize the use of sustainable building materials, such as recycled or renewable materials, low-emission finishes, and products with minimal environmental impact. Energy efficiency is another cornerstone of green design. The design should incorporate energy-efficient lighting, heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) systems, which not only reduce operational costs but also lower greenhouse gas emissions. Passive design strategies, such as maximizing natural daylight and optimizing thermal performance, can further enhance energy efficiency. Beyond its environmental benefits, green design has the potential to positively influence patient recovery and well-being. Numerous studies have shown that access to natural light, views of greenery, and a connection to nature can accelerate healing, reduce stress, and improve patient satisfaction.65-68 Architectural design should capitalize on these findings by incorporating biophilic design principles. These principles aim to reconnect patients and healthcare providers with nature through design elements like indoor gardens, green walls, and nature-inspired artwork. In addition to enhancing patient recovery, biophilic design can also contribute to the psychological well-being of staff and visitors.

There is an understanding that the critical role of sustainability and green design within HSCT units and hematology departments. By prioritizing sustainable building materials, energy-efficient systems, and biophilic design principles, healthcare facilities can not only reduce their environmental impact but also enhance patient recovery and well-being. The integration of sustainability into architectural design aligns with the evolving expectations of healthcare organizations and underscores the holistic approach required for excellence in hematopoietic cell transplantation care.

Future Directions

The landscape of healthcare is in a perpetual state of evolution, driven by scientific advancements, technological innovation, and changing patient needs. Section 9 delves into the future directions of architectural design within HSCT units and hematology departments. This section explores emerging trends, the integration of technology and artificial intelligence, and the evolving role of telemedicine in design considerations. The field of healthcare architecture is witnessing a paradigm shift in response to the evolving healthcare landscape. Emerging trends indicate a shift toward patient-centric design, where architectural solutions are tailored to individual patient needs. This includes the personalization of patient rooms and the incorporation of flexible spaces that can adapt to changing treatment modalities. Additionally, the concept of wellness-focused design is gaining prominence. Healthcare facilities are exploring ways to create environments that promote overall well-being, extending beyond the treatment of illness.69-71 Elements like access to outdoor spaces, natural light, and spaces for physical activity are becoming integral to architectural design.

The rapid advancement of technology and artificial intelligence (AI) is poised to revolutionize healthcare architectural design. Smart buildings equipped with IoT (Internet of Things) sensors can monitor patient vital signs.72,73, adjust environmental conditions, and streamline facility management. AI algorithms can analyze data from these sensors to predict and prevent equipment failures and optimize resource utilization. Furthermore, telehealth and telemedicine are becoming integral components of healthcare design. Architectural considerations now extend to creating spaces that facilitate remote consultations and virtual healthcare delivery. This includes the integration of telemedicine equipment and the design of private, secure spaces for virtual patient-provider interactions. Telemedicine has proven its value, especially during the global pandemic, and is expected to play an increasingly prominent role in healthcare delivery.74,75 Architectural design must adapt to accommodate this shift. Spaces within HSCT units and hematology departments should be designed to support telehealth consultations, ensuring that patients have access to these services while maintaining privacy and confidentiality. Furthermore, telemedicine design considerations extend beyond patient spaces. Staff workstations and meeting rooms should be equipped with the necessary technology and infrastructure to facilitate remote consultations and collaborations with colleagues and specialists.

To end with, the future directions of architectural design within HSCT units and hematology departments. Emerging trends, the integration of technology and AI, and the expanding role of telemedicine underscore the need for flexibility and adaptability in healthcare architectural design. By embracing these evolving trends, healthcare facilities can continue to provide high-quality care while staying at the forefront of innovation in the field of hematopoietic cell transplantation.

Conclusion

In the ever-evolving landscape of healthcare, the architectural design of HSCT units and hematology departments has emerged as a dynamic and indispensable factor influencing patient outcomes, healthcare quality, and environmental responsibility. This manuscript has journeyed through the multifaceted aspects of architectural design within these critical healthcare settings, underscoring its pivotal role in shaping the future of HSCT care and beyond. Throughout this exploration, it becomes abundantly clear that architectural design transcends its conventional role as a functional necessity. Instead, it emerges as an agent of profound transformation, capable of elevating the standards of care and the experiences of patients, caregivers, and healthcare providers alike. Architectural design contributes to patient-centered care by creating environments that prioritize comfort, natural light, and privacy. It empowers infection control and cleanliness through meticulous planning and the integration of advanced ventilation systems. Workflow efficiency is optimized by thoughtfully designed spaces that facilitate the delivery of timely care. Safety and emergency preparedness are bolstered by design features that prioritize the well-being of all occupants.

Furthermore, architectural design becomes a catalyst for psychological support and well-being. By offering spaces for relaxation, meditation, and emotional support, design fosters healing and minimizes the emotional burden of illness. The incorporation of art and nature elements serves as a source of inspiration and solace during challenging times. Sustainability and green design principles not only reduce the environmental footprint of healthcare facilities but also contribute to patient recovery and well-being. The future of architectural design within HSCT units and hematology departments is marked by emerging trends that emphasize patient-centricity, wellness, and the integration of technology and telemedicine. The achievements and future prospects outlined in this manuscript underscore the imperative of collaboration among healthcare professionals, architects, and designers. This collective endeavor transcends disciplinary boundaries and unites stakeholders in the common pursuit of optimal patient care. Healthcare professionals bring their expertise in clinical care and patient needs, architects contribute their knowledge of design principles and functionality, and designers infuse creativity and aesthetics into healthcare environments. Together, they form a synergistic alliance that has the potential to reshape the landscape of healthcare delivery.

As we stand at the precipice of a new era in healthcare architecture, we are presented with a profound opportunity. By prioritizing the architectural aspects of our medical facilities, we have the potential to create environments that foster improved patient experiences and successful hematopoietic cell transplantations.

This paper aims to serve as a testament to the transformative power of architectural design within HSCT units and hematology departments. It is a call to action for healthcare organizations, architects, designers, and policymakers to recognize the pivotal role of design in healthcare and to prioritize the creation of environments that support the well-being of all those touched by the intricate journey of hematopoietic cell transplantation. In conclusion, architectural design is not a passive backdrop to healthcare but an active participant in the journey towards better patient outcomes, enhanced healthcare quality, and environmental sustainability. As we continue to advance in the field of healthcare, let us not overlook the critical role that design plays in shaping the future of HSCT care and the broader landscape of healthcare delivery.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no financial conflict of interest with regard to the content of this report.

Funding source

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Author Contributions

All authors contributed equally to the article. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

References

  1. K. L. Syrjala et al., “Recovery and long-term function after hematopoietic cell transplantation for leukemia or lymphoma,” JAMA, vol. 291, no. 19, p. 2335, May 2004, doi: 10.1001/jama.291.19.2335.
  2. J. Passweg et al., “The EBMT activity survey report 2017: a focus on allogeneic HCT for nonmalignant indications and on the use of non-HCT cell therapies,” Bone Marrow Transplantation, vol. 54, no. 10, pp. 1575–1585, Feb. 2019, doi: 10.1038/s41409-019-0465-9.
  3. Dietz et al., “Disease-specific hematopoietic cell transplantation: nonmyeloablative conditioning regimen for dyskeratosis congenita,” Bone Marrow Transplantation, vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 98–104, Apr. 2010, doi: 10.1038/bmt.2010.65.
  4. S. Capolongo, “Architecture as a generator of Health and Well-Being,” Journal of Public Health Research, vol. 3, no. 1, p. jphr.2014.276, Mar. 2014, doi: 10.4081/jphr.2014.276.
  5. J. Han, “Exploitation of architectural knowledge and innovation,” Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 1–15, Sep. 2017, doi: 10.1186/s40852-017-0068-x.
  6. Y. T. Gökuç and D. Arditi, “Adoption of BIM in architectural design firms,” Architectural Science Review, vol. 60, no. 6, pp. 483–492, Oct. 2017, doi: 10.1080/00038628.2017.1383228.
  7. D. Martin, S. Nettleton, C. Buse, L. Prior, and J. Twigg, “Architecture and health care: a place for sociology,” Sociology of Health and Illness, vol. 37, no. 7, pp. 1007–1022, Apr. 2015, doi: 10.1111/1467-9566.12284.
  8. Anåker, A. Heylighen, S. Nordin, and M. Elf, “Design Quality in the context of Healthcare Environments: A scoping review,” HERD: Health Environments Research & Design Journal, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 136–150, Dec. 2016, doi: 10.1177/1937586716679404.
  9. M. Elf, P. J. Frost, G. Lindahl, and H. Wijk, “Shared decision making in designing new healthcare environments—time to begin improving quality,” BMC Health Services Research, vol. 15, no. 1, Mar. 2015, doi: 10.1186/s12913-015-0782-7.
  10. B. G. Bokhour et al., “How can healthcare organizations implement patient-centered care? Examining a large-scale cultural transformation,” BMC Health Services Research, vol. 18, no. 1, Mar. 2018, doi: 10.1186/s12913-018-2949-5.
  11. Kitson, A. Marshall, K. Bassett, and K. Zeitz, “What are the core elements of patient‐centred care? A narrative review and synthesis of the literature from health policy, medicine and nursing,” Journal of Advanced Nursing, vol. 69, no. 1, pp. 4–15, Jun. 2012, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2012.06064.x.
  12. Bechtel and D. L. Ness, “If you build it, will they come? Designing truly Patient-Centered health care,” Health Affairs, vol. 29, no. 5, pp. 914–920, May 2010, doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2010.0305.
  13. E. Persson, P. Anderberg, and A. K. Ekwall, “A room of one′s own – Being cared for in a hospital with a single‐bed room design,” Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 340–346, Sep. 2014, doi: 10.1111/scs.12168.
  14. E. S. Patterson, E. Sanders, C. M. Sommerich, S. A. Lavender, J. Li, and K. D. Evans, “Meeting Patient Expectations During Hospitalization: A Grounded Theoretical Analysis of Patient-Centered Room elements,” HERD: Health Environments Research & Design Journal, vol. 10, no. 5, pp. 95–110, Mar. 2017, doi: 10.1177/1937586717696700.
  15. S. Mihandoust, A. Joseph, S. Kennedy, P. MacNaughton, and M. Woo, “Exploring the Relationship between Window View Quantity, Quality, and Ratings of Care in the Hospital,” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, vol. 18, no. 20, p. 10677, Oct. 2021, doi: 10.3390/ijerph182010677.
  16. S. Olausson, M. Ekebergh, and B. Lindahl, “The ICU patient room: Views and meanings as experienced by the next of kin: A phenomenological hermeneutical study,” Intensive and Critical Care Nursing, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 176–184, Jun. 2012, doi: 10.1016/j.iccn.2011.12.003.
  17. J. H. Nielsen and C. Overgaard, “Healing architecture and Snoezelen in delivery room design: a qualitative study of women’s birth experiences and patient-centeredness of care,” BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, vol. 20, no. 1, May 2020, doi: 10.1186/s12884-020-02983-z.
  18. S. Olausson, M. Ekebergh, and B. Lindahl, “The ICU patient room: Views and meanings as experienced by the next of kin: A phenomenological hermeneutical study,” Intensive and Critical Care Nursing, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 176–184, Jun. 2012, doi: 10.1016/j.iccn.2011.12.003.
  19. U. Matern and S. Koneczny, “Safety, hazards and ergonomics in the operating room,” Surgical Endoscopy and Other Interventional Techniques, vol. 21, no. 11, pp. 1965–1969, May 2007, doi: 10.1007/s00464-007-9396-4.
  20. C. Gao and S. Zhang, “The restorative quality of patient ward environment: Tests of six dominant design characteristics,” Building and Environment, vol. 180, p. 107039, Aug. 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.buildenv.2020.107039.
  21. M. Kutash and L. Northrop, “Family members’ experiences of the intensive care unit waiting room,” Journal of Advanced Nursing, vol. 60, no. 4, pp. 384–388, Sep. 2007, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04388.x.
  22. C. Timmermann, L. Uhrenfeldt, and R. Birkelund, “Room for caring: patients’ experiences of well‐being, relief and hope during serious illness,” Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences, vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 426–434, Apr. 2014, doi: 10.1111/scs.12145.
  23. Durak, N. Olguntürk, C. Yener, D. Güvenç, and Y. Gürçınar, “Impact of lighting arrangements and illuminances on different impressions of a room,” Building and Environment, vol. 42, no. 10, pp. 3476–3482, Oct. 2007, doi: 10.1016/j.buildenv.2006.10.048.
  24. Bilu, H. Einat, P. Zimmet, V. Vishnevskia‐Dai, and N. Kronfeld‐Schor, “Beneficial effects of daytime high-intensity light exposure on daily rhythms, metabolic state and affect,” Scientific Reports, vol. 10, no. 1, Nov. 2020, doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-76636-8.
  25. Joseph and M. Rashid, “The architecture of safety: hospital design,” Current Opinion in Critical Care, vol. 13, no. 6, pp. 714–719, Dec. 2007, doi: 10.1097/mcc.0b013e3282f1be6e.
  26. X. Mao, P. Jia, L. Zhang, P. Zhao, Y. Chen, and M. Zhang, “An Evaluation of the Effects of human factors and ergonomics on health care and patient safety practices: A Systematic review,” PLOS ONE, vol. 10, no. 6, p. e0129948, Jun. 2015, doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0129948.
  27. Zeneli et al., “Microbiological evaluation of environmental cleanliness in haematopoietic cell transplant patient rooms: implementing JACIE standards,” Journal of Hospital Infection, vol. 104, no. 3, pp. 276–282, Mar. 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.jhin.2019.11.016.
  28. Ren, H. Zhu, and S.-J. Cao, “Ventilation Strategies for Mitigation of infection Disease transmission in an indoor environment: a case study in office,” Buildings, vol. 12, no. 2, p. 180, Feb. 2022, doi: 10.3390/buildings12020180.
  29. H. Qian, Y. Li, W. H. Seto, P. Ching, W. H. Ching, and H. Sun, “Natural ventilation for reducing airborne infection in hospitals,” Building and Environment, vol. 45, no. 3, pp. 559–565, Mar. 2010, doi: 10.1016/j.buildenv.2009.07.011.
  30. R. C. M. Yam, P. L. Yuen, R. Yung, and T. C. Choy, “Rethinking hospital general ward ventilation design using computational fluid dynamics,” Journal of Hospital Infection, vol. 77, no. 1, pp. 31–36, Jan. 2011, doi: 10.1016/j.jhin.2010.08.010.
  31. H. Cheong, B. Park, and S.-H. Lee, “Design method to prevent airborne infection in an emergency department,” Journal of Asian Architecture and Building Engineering, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 573–579, Sep. 2018, doi: 10.3130/jaabe.17.581.
  32. S. J. Dancer, “Controlling Hospital-Acquired Infection: Focus on the role of the environment and new technologies for decontamination,” Clinical Microbiology Reviews, vol. 27, no. 4, pp. 665–690, Oct. 2014, doi: 10.1128/cmr.00020-14.
  33. S.-E. Lee et al., “Detection of novel coronavirus on the surface of environmental materials contaminated by COVID-19 patients in the Republic of Korea,” Osong Public Health and Research Perspectives, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 128–132, Jun. 2020, doi: 10.24171/j.phrp.2020.11.3.03.
  34. S. M. Hinsa-Leasure, Q. Nartey, J. Vaverka, and M. G. Schmidt, “Copper alloy surfaces sustain terminal cleaning levels in a rural hospital,” American Journal of Infection Control, vol. 44, no. 11, pp. e195–e203, Nov. 2016, doi: 10.1016/j.ajic.2016.06.033.
  35. M. King, C. Noakes, A. Sleigh, and M. A. Camargo‐Valero, “Bioaerosol deposition in single and two-bed hospital rooms: A numerical and experimental study,” Building and Environment, vol. 59, pp. 436–447, Jan. 2013, doi: 10.1016/j.buildenv.2012.09.011.
  36. S. C. Schimpff, D. M. Hahn, M. D. Brouillet, V. M. Young, C. L. Fortner, and P. H. Wiernik, “Comparison of basic infection prevention techniques, with standard room reverse isolation or with reverse isolation plus added air filtration,” Leukemia Research, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 231–240, Jan. 1978, doi: 10.1016/0145-2126(78)90041-3.
  37. S. Napoleon et al., “Considerations for STI clinics during the COVID-19 pandemic,” Sexually Transmitted Diseases, vol. 47, no. 7, pp. 431–433, Apr. 2020, doi: 10.1097/olq.0000000000001192.
  38. W. Li et al., “Asymptomatic COVID-19 Patients Can Contaminate Their Surroundings: an Environment Sampling Study,” mSphere, vol. 5, no. 3, Jun. 2020, doi: 10.1128/msphere.00442-20.
  39. F. Qi et al., “Nonhuman primate allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation by intraosseus vs intravenous injection: Engraftment, donor cell distribution, and mechanistic basis,” Experimental Hematology, vol. 36, no. 11, pp. 1556–1566, Nov. 2008, doi: 10.1016/j.exphem.2008.06.010.
  40. J. Kesecioğlu, M. M. E. Schneider, A. W. Van Der Kooi, and J. Bion, “Structure and function,” Current Opinion in Critical Care, vol. 18, no. 6, pp. 688–692, Dec. 2012, doi: 10.1097/mcc.0b013e328358d4bd.
  41. S. J. Wu and W. Raghupathi, “A panel analysis of the strategic association between information and communication technology and public health delivery,” Journal of Medical Internet Research, vol. 14, no. 5, p. e147, Oct. 2012, doi: 10.2196/jmir.2242.
  42. Gharaveis, D. K. Hamilton, and D. Pati, “The Impact of environmental design on teamwork and communication in healthcare Facilities: a systematic literature review,” HERD: Health Environments Research & Design Journal, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 119–137, Oct. 2017, doi: 10.1177/1937586717730333.
  43. J. Kang et al., “Rapidly measuring spatial accessibility of COVID-19 healthcare resources: a case study of Illinois, USA,” International Journal of Health Geographics, vol. 19, no. 1, Sep. 2020, doi: 10.1186/s12942-020-00229-x.
  44. R. Finn and J. Waring, “Organizational barriers to architectural knowledge and teamwork in operating theatres,” Public Money & Management, vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 117–124, Apr. 2006, doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9302.2006.00510.x.
  45. W. Y. Chang, J. Chu, H. T. Chiu, K. C. Lin, and P. H. Lee, “Job satisfaction and perceptions of quality of patient care, collaboration and teamwork in acute care hospitals,” Journal of Advanced Nursing, vol. 65, no. 9, pp. 1946–1955, Aug. 2009, doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2009.05085.x.
  46. J. A. Leigh, P. W. Long, and B. Barraclough, “The Clinical Support Systems Program: supporting system‐wide improvement,” Medical Journal of Australia, vol. 180, no. S10, May 2004, doi: 10.5694/j.1326-5377.2004.tb06080.x.
  47. R. Guilfoyle et al., “Performance status, but not the Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation Comorbidity Index (HCT-CI), predicts mortality at a Canadian transplant center,” Bone Marrow Transplantation, vol. 43, no. 2, pp. 133–139, Sep. 2008, doi: 10.1038/bmt.2008.300.
  48. H. Devine and E. S. DeMeyer, “Hematopoietic cell transplantation in the treatment of leukemia,” Seminars in Oncology Nursing, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 118–132, May 2003, doi: 10.1016/s0749-2081(03)00008-1.
  49. Foord et al., “Late infectious complications in hematopoietic cell transplantation survivors: a population-based study,” Blood Advances, vol. 4, no. 7, pp. 1232–1241, Mar. 2020, doi: 10.1182/bloodadvances.2020001470.
  50. M. L. Sorror et al., “Hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT)-specific-comorbidity index: A new tool for risk assessment before allogeneic HCT,” Biology of Blood and Marrow Transplantation, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 23–24, Feb. 2005, doi: 10.1016/j.bbmt.2004.12.067.
  51. L. M. Wu et al., “Pre‐bereavement meaning and post‐bereavement distress in mothers of children who underwent haematopoietic stem cell transplantation,” British Journal of Health Psychology, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 419–433, Sep. 2008, doi: 10.1348/135910707x204236.
  52. Braamse et al., “A randomized clinical trial on the effectiveness of an intervention to treat psychological distress and improve quality of life after autologous stem cell transplantation,” Annals of Hematology, vol. 95, no. 1, pp. 105–114, Sep. 2015, doi: 10.1007/s00277-015-2509-6.
  53. K. B. Ehrlich et al., “Pre-transplant emotional support is associated with longer survival after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation,” Bone Marrow Transplantation, vol. 51, no. 12, pp. 1594–1598, Jul. 2016, doi: 10.1038/bmt.2016.191.
  54. H. Jim et al., “Caregivers’ quality of life after blood and marrow transplantation: a qualitative study,” Bone Marrow Transplantation, vol. 49, no. 9, pp. 1234–1236, Jun. 2014, doi: 10.1038/bmt.2014.118.
  55. M. Dharmawardene, J. L. Givens, A. Wachholtz, S. Makowski, and J. Tjia, “A systematic review and meta-analysis of meditative interventions for informal caregivers and health professionals,” BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 160–169, Mar. 2015, doi: 10.1136/bmjspcare-2014-000819.
  56. H. Dalke et al., “Colour and lighting in hospital design,” Optics and Laser Technology, vol. 38, no. 4–6, pp. 343–365, Jun. 2006, doi: 10.1016/j.optlastec.2005.06.040.
  57. S. Olausson, H. Wijk, I. J. Berglund, A. Pihlgren, and E. Danielson, “Patients’ experiences of place and space after a relocation to evidence‐based designed forensic psychiatric hospitals,” International Journal of Mental Health Nursing, vol. 30, no. 5, pp. 1210–1220, May 2021, doi: 10.1111/inm.12871.
  58. Cleary, K. S. Fielding, S. Bell, Z. Murray, and A. Roiko, “Exploring potential mechanisms involved in the relationship between eudaimonic wellbeing and nature connection,” Landscape and Urban Planning, vol. 158, pp. 119–128, Feb. 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.10.003.
  59. H.-T. H. Mahmoud, “Interior Architectural Elements that Affect Human Psychology and Behavior,” ARCHive-SR, vol. 1, no. 1, p. 10, Sep. 2017, doi: 10.21625/archive.v1i1.112.
  60. S. Capolongo, “Architecture as a generator of Health and Well-Being,” Journal of Public Health Research, vol. 3, no. 1, p. jphr.2014.276, Mar. 2014, doi: 10.4081/jphr.2014.276.
  61. F. Vergunst, H. Berry, J. Rugkåsa, T. Burns, A. Molodynski, and D. Maughan, “Applying the triple bottom line of sustainability to healthcare research—a feasibility study,” International Journal for Quality in Health Care, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 48–53, May 2019, doi: 10.1093/intqhc/mzz049.
  62. L. Lennox, L. Maher, and J. Reed, “Navigating the sustainability landscape: a systematic review of sustainability approaches in healthcare,” Implementation Science, vol. 13, no. 1, Feb. 2018, doi: 10.1186/s13012-017-0707-4.
  63. R. Höfer and J. Bigorra, “Green chemistry—a sustainable solution for industrial specialties applications,” Green Chemistry, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 203–212, Jan. 2007, doi: 10.1039/b606377b.
  64. R. S. Zadeh, X. Xuan, and M. M. Shepley, “Sustainable healthcare design,” Facilities, vol. 34, no. 5/6, pp. 264–288, Apr. 2016, doi: 10.1108/f-09-2013-0067.
  65. R. Tomovska and A. Radivojević, “Tracing sustainable design strategies in the example of the traditional Ohrid house,” Journal of Cleaner Production, vol. 147, pp. 10–24, Mar. 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.01.073.
  66. U. Y. A. Tettey, A. Dodoo, and L. Gustavsson, “Primary energy implications of different design strategies for an apartment building,” Energy, vol. 104, pp. 132–148, Jun. 2016, doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2016.03.071.
  67. H. J. Holtzhausen, “Embodied energy and its impact on architectural decisions,” Ecology and the Environment, Apr. 2007, doi: 10.2495/sdp070361.
  68. Balali and A. Valipour, “Identification and selection of building façade’s smart materials according to sustainable development goals,” Sustainable Materials and Technologies, vol. 26, p. e00213, Dec. 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.susmat.2020.e00213.
  69. N. S. Majhail, “Optimizing quality and efficiency of healthcare delivery in hematopoietic cell transplantation,” Current Hematologic Malignancy Reports, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 199–204, May 2015, doi: 10.1007/s11899-015-0264-3.
  70. J. Passweg et al., “The EBMT activity survey on hematopoietic-cell transplantation and cellular therapy 2018: CAR-T’s come into focus,” Bone Marrow Transplantation, vol. 55, no. 8, pp. 1604–1613, Feb. 2020, doi: 10.1038/s41409-020-0826-4.
  71. M. H. G. P. Raaijmakers and D. T. Scadden, “Evolving concepts on the microenvironmental niche for hematopoietic stem cells,” Current Opinion in Hematology, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 301–306, Jul. 2008, doi: 10.1097/moh.0b013e328303e14c.
  72. J. Raffort et al., “Artificial intelligence in abdominal aortic aneurysm,” Journal of Vascular Surgery, vol. 72, no. 1, pp. 321-333.e1, Jul. 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2019.12.026.
  73. H. Kashou, A. M. May, and P. A. Noseworthy, “Artificial Intelligence-Enabled ECG: a Modern Lens on an Old Technology,” Current Cardiology Reports, vol. 22, no. 8, Jun. 2020, doi: 10.1007/s11886-020-01317-x.
  74. W. Wei, M. Guizani, S. H. Ahmed, and C. Zhu, “Guest editorial: Special section on Integration of Big Data and Artificial intelligence for Internet of Things,” IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 2562–2565, Apr. 2020, doi: 10.1109/tii.2019.2958638.
  75. Lee and S. N. Yoon, “Application of Artificial Intelligence-Based Technologies in the Healthcare Industry: Opportunities and challenges,” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, vol. 18, no. 1, p. 271, Jan. 2021, doi: 10.3390/ijerph18010271

Cite this article

Citation BibTeXRIS / EndNote
APA

Vancouver

Scroll to Top