The "ambiance" of a space has an effect on people using the space. In recent years, design for health care environments has begun to include esthetic enhancements in an attempt to reduce stress and anxiety, increase patient satisfaction, and promote health and healing. In this paper, the authors survey the existing research on those elements of the built and natural environment most often asserted by proponents as being inherently healing or promoting health. We postulate a hierarchy of effect of environmental elements ranging from simply nontoxic to safe (both physically and psychologically) to "providing a positive context" to being actively salutogenic. Most relevant research has been concentrated on a limited number of settings and is inadequate to inform the creation of design guidelines for the physical elements of an optimal healing environment. Opportunities exist to make meaningful contributions in this area that are likely to make a significant impact on health outcomes of human beings.

Patient and family engaged care (PFEC) is care planned, delivered, managed, and continuously improved in active partnership with patients and their families (or care partners as defined by the patient) to ensure integration of their health and health care goals, preferences, and values. It includes explicit and partnered determination of goals and care options, and it requires ongoing assessment of the care match with patient goals. This vision represents a shift in the traditional role patients and families have historically played in their own health care teams, as well as in ongoing quality improvement and care delivery efforts. PFEC also represents an important shift from focusing solely on care processes to aligning those processes to best address the health outcomes that matter to patients. In a culture of PFEC, patients are not merely subjects of their care; they are active participants whose voices are honored. Family and/or care partners are not kept an arm's length away as spectators, but participate as integral members of their loved one's care team. Individuals' (and their families') expertise about their bodies, lifestyles, and priorities is incorporated into care planning and their care experience is valued and incorporated into improvement efforts.

No abstract

Patients at the center of care is often the stated focus of clinicians and healthcare services. The quality and safety movement has shown that effective organization of care is needed, in addition to professional skills. This movement has provided professionals and others with methods to improve both organization and practice for patients. These methods include measurement to give those carrying out improvement feedback about the effects of their changes. New types of measures that enable patients to report treatment outcomes can now be use in quality improvement and quality reporting to bring a renewed focus on making care more patient-centered. Although used for some time in research, these measures are relatively new tools for quality improvement and not all research measures are suitable for everyday feedback or improvement projects. The purpose of the paper is to provide an introduction to the use and value of patient-reported outcome measures in quality improvement and to give practical guidance and resources for using PROMs for quality improvement. It draws on the authors' experiences using patient reported outcomes measures for quality research and improvement and their workshop at the 2016 Tokyo ISQUA conference, as well as on reviews and guidance documents about the use of PROMs. It does not provide a comprehensive and systematic review of research, but an overview and introduction to PROMs for quality improvement.

The Institute of Medicine defines patient-centered care as "providing care that is respectful of, and responsive to, individual patient preferences, needs and values, and ensuring that patient values guide all clinical decisions." What is missing in this definition is an explicit emphasis on compassion. This perspective article draws on the experience of Planetree (CT, USA), a not-for-profit organization that partners with healthcare establishments to drive adoption of patient-centered care principles and practices by connecting healthcare professionals with the voices and perspectives of the patients and family members who utilize their services. Across hundreds of focus groups facilitated by Planetree, patients and their loved ones emphasize that paramount among their needs, preferences and values are compassionate human interactions. For care to be truly patient-centered, a foundation of compassion is essential. Reports from patients and the media, and research from healthcare systems around the world demonstrate the fallacy of assuming that compassion is a current or prevalent feature of the care experience. Concurrently, a growing evidence base highlights the supreme importance of compassion in driving high-quality, high-value care. However, good intentions are not sufficient for delivering compassionate care. Drawing on the experiences of exemplary patient-centered hospitals (recognized as such following a rigorous culture audit to determine fulfillment of the criteria for formal recognition as a Designated® Patient-Centered Hospital [Planetree]), this paper explores practical approaches for embedding compassion in healthcare delivery and organizational culture to meet patients' expressed desires for empathic and respectful human interactions.

The "ambiance" of a space has an effect on people using the space. In recent years, design for health care environments has begun to include esthetic enhancements in an attempt to reduce stress and anxiety, increase patient satisfaction, and promote health and healing. In this paper, the authors survey the existing research on those elements of the built and natural environment most often asserted by proponents as being inherently healing or promoting health. We postulate a hierarchy of effect of environmental elements ranging from simply nontoxic to safe (both physically and psychologically) to "providing a positive context" to being actively salutogenic. Most relevant research has been concentrated on a limited number of settings and is inadequate to inform the creation of design guidelines for the physical elements of an optimal healing environment. Opportunities exist to make meaningful contributions in this area that are likely to make a significant impact on health outcomes of human beings.

Purpose With increased focus on resident‐centered care (RCC) as an organizational imperative and a guiding principle of culture change for long‐term care communities, evaluation of its success has centered primarily on the organizational perspective. Methods For this case report, we examine resident perspectives of RCC in 10 nursing homes across the United States that had adopted RCC as a philosophy and model of care for at least 12 months with a maximum engagement of 3 years using a phenomenological approach. Findings Qualitative findings from 20 focus groups with residents in 10 nursing homes suggest that RCC has meaning in ways that are consistent with intentions at the national and state levels to advance culture change in nursing homes, including efforts to create a more homelike environment, increase resident decision making and direction of his or her lifestyle, and put residents first. Clinical Relevance Residents attribute increased choice in wake and bed times, being heard by organizational leaders, and consistent staff assignment as positive changes since RCC began. However, according to residents, aspects of institutional life in nursing homes, inconsistent with RCC, remain. Residents identified three areas of improvement that would make nursing homes more resident centered. The three areas are response time, access to nature, and transparency about illness and death in the community.

No abstract