سنجش میزان اثربخشی مؤلفه‌های طراحی بیوفیلیک بر ارتقای شاخصه‌های سلامت بیماران در محیط‌های درمانی (مطالعه موردی: در شهر مشهد)
محورهای موضوعی : -مدیریت خدمات بهداشتی و درمانی
سیده مریم موسوی
1
(دانشجوی دکتری، گروه معماری، واحد بیرجند، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، بیرجند، ایران)
رضا میرزایی
2
(استادیار، گروه معماری، واحد بیرجند، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، بیرجند، ایران)
احمد حیدری
3
(استادیار، گروه هنر و معماری، واحد بیرجند، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، بیرجند، ایران)
سیده نگار اسعدی
4
(دانشیار، مرکز تحقیقات عوامل اجتماعی موثر بر سلامت، دانشگاه علوم پزشکی، مشهد، ایران)
کلید واژه: شاخصه‌های سلامت, کیفیت زیستی محیط, تعامل انسان و محیط, محیط درمانی, طراحی بیوفیلیک,
چکیده مقاله :
مقدمه: مطالعه حاضر به منظور ارزیابی تأثیرات طراحی بیوفیلیک در محیط‌های درمانی در راستای ارتقای شاخصه‌های سلامت بیماران صورت گرفت. تکیه بر طراحی بیوفیلیک در راستای تعامل انسان و محیط در جهت افزایش کیفیت محیطی و اثرگذاری بلحاظ روانشناختی بر بیماران، می‌تواند امری ضروری باشد. روش پژوهش: در این پژوهش سه بعد اصلی از طراحی بیوفیلیک به همراه مؤلفه‌های آن در قالب پرسشنامه مورد سنجش قرار گرفت. افراد شرکت کننده در این نظر سنجی شامل سه گروه: معماران، بیماران و کادر درمان بوده که در برخی بیمارستان‌های شهر مشهد انجام شد. داده‌های گردآوری شده از روش‌های مناسب آماری توسط نرم افزارSPSS ، آزمون T و آزمون ANOVA مورد سنجش قرار گرفته‌اند. هدف این پژوهش مقایسه عوامل تاثیر گذار طراحی بیوفیلیک بر ارتقای شاخصه‌های سلامتی در محیط درمانی می‌باشد. یافته‌ها: طبق داده‌ها و آزمون‌های انجام شده در در هر سه گروه، میزان عامل تجربه مستقیم طبیعت بالاترین امتیاز به مقدار 68 درصد و بعد از آن عامل تجربه غیر مستقیم طبیعت با تاثیر 28 درصد و ماهیت مکان و فضا با تاثیر 19 درصد بوده است که نشان دهنده اثربخشی بالای عامل تجربه مستقیم طبیعت به صورت مشترک در میان گروه‌ها با وجود اختلاف نظر، می‌باشد. نتیجه‌گیری: نتایج تحلیلی این پژوهش، بیانگر تأثیر بیشتر وجود طبیعت در محیط انسان ساخت می‌باشد و خود نشان گر ارتباط مثبت میان بیمار و طبیعت و بهبود کیفیات زیستی محیط درمانی می‌باشد. بنابراین طراحی محیط درمانی بیوفیلی می‌تواند منجر به ارتقای شاخصه‌های سلامت بیمار شود.
Introduction: The present study was conducted to evaluate the effects of biophilic design in therapeutic environments in order to improve patients' health characteristics. It may be necessary to rely on biophilic architecture in terms of human-environment interaction to increase environmental quality and psychological impact on patients. Methods: In this study, three main dimensions of biophilic design with its components were assessed in the form of a questionnaire. Participants in this survey included three groups: architects, patients and medical staff, which was conducted in some hospitals in Mashhad. The collected data were analyzed by appropriate statistical methods by SPSS software, t-test and ANOVA test. The aim of this study was to compare the effective factors of biophilic design on the promotion of health characteristics in the therapeutic environment. Result: According to the data and tests performed in all three groups, the rate of direct experience of nature was the highest score of 68%, followed by indirect experience of nature with an impact of 28% and the nature of place and space with an impact of 19%. Demonstrates the high effectiveness of the direct experience of nature commonly shared among groups despite differences. Conclusion: The analytical results of this study indicate that the existence of nature in the human environment has a greater impact and shows the positive relationship between the patient and nature and the improvement of the biological quality of the treatment environment. Therefore, designing a biophilic treatment environment can lead to improved patient health characteristics.
1- Kellert S. Birthright: People and nature in the modern world, First ed. London: Yale
University Press; 2012.
2- Mahmudi nejad H. Biophilic architecture: Friendship with nature in design, First Ed.
Tehran: Tahan; 2019. (In Persian)
3- Totaforti S. Applying the benefits of biophilic theory to hospital design, Journal of City, Territory and Architecture, 2018; 5(1): 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40410-018-0077-5
4- Heerwagen J H, Hase B. Building biophilia: connecting people to nature in building design. Environmental Design + Construction, Mar/Apr; 2001: 30-36. http://www.usgbc.org/Docs/Archive/
5- Kahn PH. Developmental Psycology and the Biophilia Hypothesis: Children’s Affiliation with Nature, Developmental Review, 1997; 17: 1-61.
6- Kellert S, Wilson E.O. The biophilia Hypothesis, Washington: Island Press; 1993.
7- Yin J, Zhu S, MacNaughton P, Allen JG, Spengler JD. Physiological and Cognitive performance of exposure to biophilic indoor environment. Journal of Building and Environment, 2018; 132(23): 255-262.
8- Browing et.al. 14 patterns of Biophilic Design Improving Health and Well-Being in the Built environment, Terrapin Bright Green LLc, New York NY: Washington DC; 2014.
9- Kellert SR, Heerwagen J, Mador M. Biophilic Design: The Theory, Science and Practice of Bringing Buildings to life, New Jersy: John Wiley & Sons; 2008.
10- Bowler DE, Buyung AL, Knight T M, Pullin A S. A systematic review of evidence for the added benefits to health of exposure to natural environments, Journal of BMC Public Health, 2010; 10(456): 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-10-456
11- Kaplan R. The nature of the view from home: psychological benefits, Journal of Enviromental and Behavior, 2001; 33(4): 507-542.
12- Gifford B, Megunn LJ. Appraisals of built environment and approaches to building design that pomote well-being and healthy behavior In Environment psychology an Introduction: hobooken, USA: 2012.
13- Martin G, Inchley J, Marshall A, Shortt N, Currie C. The neighbourhood social environment and alcohol use among urban and rural Scottish adolescents, International Journal of Public Health, 2019; 64(1): 95–105. Published online 2018 Dec 3. doi: 10.1007/s00038-018-1181-8
14- Salingaros N. The Biophilic Healing Index Predicts Effects of the Built Environment on Our Wellbeing, Journal of Biourbanism, 2019; 8(1): 13-34.
15- Almusaed A, Abdushaik Z, Khalil S. Biophilic architecture – the concept of healthy sustainable architecture, The 23rd Conference on Passive and Low Energy Architecture; 2006 September 6–8; Geneva, Switzerland: Springer; 2006: 383-386.
16- March RE, Horner R. Feasibility and Contributions of Functional Behavioral Assessment in Schools, Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 2002; 10(3): 158-170.
17- Jamshidi S, Parker J, Hashemi SN. The Effects of Environmental Factors on the Patient Outcomes in Hospital Environments: A Review of Literature, Frontiers of Architectural Research, 2020; 9(2): 249-263.
18- Najafi A. Analysis and Recognition of the Effect of Interior Design of Medical Environments on Improving the Performance of Patients Hospitalized in Psychiatric Wards, Journal of Behavioral Sciences Research, 2016; 14(3): 289-281.
19- AbdelMeguid S. Biophilic Design (Strategies for hospitals retrofit). M.A. Thesis. Stuttgart: University of Germany; 2014.
20- Downton P, Jones D, Zeunert J, Roös PH. Biophilic Design Applications: Putting Theory and Patterns into Built Environment Practice, DesTech Conference Proceedings, the international conference on design and technology; 2017: 596-606.
21- Ulrich R, Zimring S, Zhu C, DuBose X, Seo J, Joseph A. et al. A review of the research literature on evidence-based healthcare design, Environments Research & Design Journal, 2008; 1(3): 61-125.
22- Browning WD, Ryan CO, Clancy JO. 14 Patterns of Biophilic Design, Terrapin Bright Green LLC, New York; 2014.
_||_1- Kellert S. Birthright: People and nature in the modern world, First ed. London: Yale
University Press; 2012.
2- Mahmudi nejad H. Biophilic architecture: Friendship with nature in design, First Ed.
Tehran: Tahan; 2019. (In Persian)
3- Totaforti S. Applying the benefits of biophilic theory to hospital design, Journal of City, Territory and Architecture, 2018; 5(1): 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40410-018-0077-5
4- Heerwagen J H, Hase B. Building biophilia: connecting people to nature in building design. Environmental Design + Construction, Mar/Apr; 2001: 30-36. http://www.usgbc.org/Docs/Archive/
5- Kahn PH. Developmental Psycology and the Biophilia Hypothesis: Children’s Affiliation with Nature, Developmental Review, 1997; 17: 1-61.
6- Kellert S, Wilson E.O. The biophilia Hypothesis, Washington: Island Press; 1993.
7- Yin J, Zhu S, MacNaughton P, Allen JG, Spengler JD. Physiological and Cognitive performance of exposure to biophilic indoor environment. Journal of Building and Environment, 2018; 132(23): 255-262.
8- Browing et.al. 14 patterns of Biophilic Design Improving Health and Well-Being in the Built environment, Terrapin Bright Green LLc, New York NY: Washington DC; 2014.
9- Kellert SR, Heerwagen J, Mador M. Biophilic Design: The Theory, Science and Practice of Bringing Buildings to life, New Jersy: John Wiley & Sons; 2008.
10- Bowler DE, Buyung AL, Knight T M, Pullin A S. A systematic review of evidence for the added benefits to health of exposure to natural environments, Journal of BMC Public Health, 2010; 10(456): 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-10-456
11- Kaplan R. The nature of the view from home: psychological benefits, Journal of Enviromental and Behavior, 2001; 33(4): 507-542.
12- Gifford B, Megunn LJ. Appraisals of built environment and approaches to building design that pomote well-being and healthy behavior In Environment psychology an Introduction: hobooken, USA: 2012.
13- Martin G, Inchley J, Marshall A, Shortt N, Currie C. The neighbourhood social environment and alcohol use among urban and rural Scottish adolescents, International Journal of Public Health, 2019; 64(1): 95–105. Published online 2018 Dec 3. doi: 10.1007/s00038-018-1181-8
14- Salingaros N. The Biophilic Healing Index Predicts Effects of the Built Environment on Our Wellbeing, Journal of Biourbanism, 2019; 8(1): 13-34.
15- Almusaed A, Abdushaik Z, Khalil S. Biophilic architecture – the concept of healthy sustainable architecture, The 23rd Conference on Passive and Low Energy Architecture; 2006 September 6–8; Geneva, Switzerland: Springer; 2006: 383-386.
16- March RE, Horner R. Feasibility and Contributions of Functional Behavioral Assessment in Schools, Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 2002; 10(3): 158-170.
17- Jamshidi S, Parker J, Hashemi SN. The Effects of Environmental Factors on the Patient Outcomes in Hospital Environments: A Review of Literature, Frontiers of Architectural Research, 2020; 9(2): 249-263.
18- Najafi A. Analysis and Recognition of the Effect of Interior Design of Medical Environments on Improving the Performance of Patients Hospitalized in Psychiatric Wards, Journal of Behavioral Sciences Research, 2016; 14(3): 289-281.
19- AbdelMeguid S. Biophilic Design (Strategies for hospitals retrofit). M.A. Thesis. Stuttgart: University of Germany; 2014.
20- Downton P, Jones D, Zeunert J, Roös PH. Biophilic Design Applications: Putting Theory and Patterns into Built Environment Practice, DesTech Conference Proceedings, the international conference on design and technology; 2017: 596-606.
21- Ulrich R, Zimring S, Zhu C, DuBose X, Seo J, Joseph A. et al. A review of the research literature on evidence-based healthcare design, Environments Research & Design Journal, 2008; 1(3): 61-125.
22- Browning WD, Ryan CO, Clancy JO. 14 Patterns of Biophilic Design, Terrapin Bright Green LLC, New York; 2014.