The experiences of cancer patients within the material hospital environment: Three ways that materiality is affective

Wiltshire, Gareth; Pullen, Emma; Brown, Frankie; Osborn, Mike; Wexler, Sarah; Beresford, Mark; Tooley, Mark; Turner, James

doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2020.113402

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 50 publications

(68 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To prevent selection bias, two of the authors read and reviewed the 25 full-text studies separately. Subsequently, nine papers were included in the synthesis (Abdelaal & Soebarto, 2019;Blaschke et al, 2017Blaschke et al, , 2018Nejati et al, 2016;Peditto et al, 2020;Putrino et al, 2020;Tanja-Dijkstra & Andrade, 2018;Tinner et al, 2018;Wiltshire et al, 2020).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Systematic Review and Conceptual Framework of Biophilic Design Parameters in Clinical Environments

Tekin

Corcoran

Gutiérrez

2022

HERD

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: To provide a live-experience knowledge base about biophilic design parameters and environmental features to inform policy and design in clinical therapeutic environments. Background: It is increasingly important to review hospital design to make the best use of the affordances of natural elements in supporting both patients’ and staff’s physical and psychological well-being. The biophilic design theory provides an appropriate design approach. However, current biophilic design frameworks fail to provide efficiently standardized guidance. This systematic review aims to examine the experience of hospital users (patients and staff) with a view to informing a standardized biophilic design framework to improve future design in this context. Methods: This study performed a review and synthesis of nine studies identified using systematic procedures focusing on biophilic design features in healthcare environments. Results: The study identified a selection of biophilic parameters specifically relevant to this building typology, according to three different user groups: outpatients (fresh air, light-daylight, thermal comfort, welcoming and relaxing), inpatients (feeling relaxed and comfortable, prospect refuge, security and protection, light-daylight, view), and staff (privacy-refuge, quietness). Conclusions: The systematically identified studies helped to identify and rank the biophilic design parameters that appear the most critical for promoting and supporting human health and well-being in clinical therapeutic environments from the user’s perspective. It also provides an up-to-date compilation of crucial design interventions related to biophilic parameters and as such provides benchmark information for future research and design guidance in these environments.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Systematic Review and Conceptual Framework of Biophilic Design Parameters in Clinical Environments

Tekin

Corcoran

Gutiérrez

2022

HERD

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Four focus groups were conducted between February and July 2018 at a UK hospital facilitated by the authors with expertise in qualitative research (GW) and exercise physiology (FFB and JET). 29 They involved women and men only in the breast cancer and prostate cancer groups, respectively; and a mix of men and women in blood cancer groups. We are mindful of how our academic backgrounds and family histories of cancer may have shaped data collection and analysis.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

‘You’re kind of left to your own devices’: a qualitative focus group study of patients with breast, prostate or blood cancer at a hospital in the South West of England, exploring their engagement with exercise and physical activity during cancer treatment and in the months following standard care

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to explore the experiences of patients with breast, prostate or blood cancer, regarding their (1) engagement with exercise and physical activity during treatment and in the months following standard care, and (2) the meanings attached to these lifestyle behaviours.DesignA qualitative study using focus groups. The groups were audio recorded, transcribed and analysed using Framework analysis.SettingA hospital-based cancer treatment centre in the South-West of England.ParticipantsEighteen people who had either completed treatment or were currently on maintenance therapy for breast, prostate or blood cancer (non‐Hodgkin lymphoma or Hodgkin lymphoma).ResultsParticipants reported treatment limiting their ability to engage in exercise and physical activity. However, participants were aware of the physiological, emotional and social benefits of exercise and expressed a desire to maintain a physically active lifestyle before, during and after treatment. They noted a lack of concrete guidance and appropriate exercise classes for people with cancer and felt poorly informed about the type, intensity, duration and frequency of exercise they should be undertaking. As such, participants reported making decisions on their own, relying on their intuition and listening to their bodies to gauge whether they were doing enough exercise (or not).ConclusionsParticipants were aware of the benefits of a physically active lifestyle during and following cancer treatment, but were not familiar with exercise and physical activity guidelines for people living with and beyond cancer. There is a need for healthcare professionals, academics and policy makers to determine how exercise and physical activity can be supported in clinical settings in realistic and meaningful ways accommodating individual patient circumstances.

show abstract

“…Writings on the assemblages of health, illness and recovery highlight that these embodied experiences are always part of more-than-human gatherings (assemblages) that are continually coming together and coming apart as people move through their everyday worlds ( Andrews and Duff, 2019 ; Lupton, 2019 ; Wiltshire et al, 2020 ). The concept of therapeutic landscapes, as espoused in cultural geographies, relates to how people's locations in place and space, both built environments and natural landscapes, evoke multisensory and affective states that can contribute to health, wellbeing and care ( Thompson, 2021 ; Wright, 2019 ).…”

Section: Conceptual Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…They all emphasise that nonhuman agents are entangled with humans in the provision and experience of health care in both expert and informal contexts, including self-care and the use of digital technologies such as online forums and mobile apps. Together, these more-than-human assemblages generate affective forces of wellbeing, distress, safety, threat or recovery ( Wiltshire et al, 2020 ; Wright, 2019 ) that can lead to opening or closing capacities for action ( Lupton, 2019 ).…”

Section: Conceptual Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sociomaterialities of health, risk and care during COVID-19: Experiences of Australians living with a medical condition

Lupton

Lewis

2022

Social Science & Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The experiences of cancer patients within the material hospital environment: Three ways that materiality is affective

Cited by 4 publications

References 50 publications

A Systematic Review and Conceptual Framework of Biophilic Design Parameters in Clinical Environments

A Systematic Review and Conceptual Framework of Biophilic Design Parameters in Clinical Environments

Sociomaterialities of health, risk and care during COVID-19: Experiences of Australians living with a medical condition

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About