Imperial College London
Portrait Picture

ProfessorJamesBarlow

Business School

Chair in Technology and Innovation Management
 
 
 
//

Contact

 

+44 (0)20 7594 5936j.barlow Website CV

 
 
//

Assistant

 

Mrs Lorraine Sheehy +44 (0)20 7594 9173

 
//

Location

 

Room 197EBusiness School BuildingSouth Kensington Campus

//

Summary

 

Publications

Citation

BibTex format

@article{Maben:2015:10.1136/bmjqs-2015-004265,
author = {Maben, J and Griffiths, P and Penfold, C and Simon, M and Anderson, JE and Robert, G and Pizzo, E and Hughes, J and Murrells, T and Barlow, J},
doi = {10.1136/bmjqs-2015-004265},
journal = {BMJ Quality & Safety},
pages = {241--256},
title = {One size fits all? Mixed methods evaluation of the impact of 100% single-room accommodation on staff and patient experience, safety and costs.},
url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2015-004265},
volume = {25},
year = {2015}
}
Download

RIS format (EndNote, RefMan)

TY  - JOUR
AB  - BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: There is little strong evidence relating to the impact of single-room accommodation on healthcare quality and safety. We explore the impact of all single rooms on staff and patient experience; safety outcomes; and costs. METHODS: Mixed methods pre/post 'move' comparison within four nested case study wards in a single acute hospital with 100% single rooms; quasi-experimental before-and-after study with two control hospitals; analysis of capital and operational costs associated with single rooms. RESULTS: Two-thirds of patients expressed a preference for single rooms with comfort and control outweighing any disadvantages (sense of isolation) felt by some. Patients appreciated privacy, confidentiality and flexibility for visitors afforded by single rooms. Staff perceived improvements (patient comfort and confidentiality), but single rooms were worse for visibility, surveillance, teamwork, monitoring and keeping patients safe. Staff walking distances increased significantly post move. A temporary increase of falls and medication errors in one ward was likely to be associated with the need to adjust work patterns rather than associated with single rooms per se. We found no evidence that single rooms reduced infection rates. Building an all single-room hospital can cost 5% more with higher housekeeping and cleaning costs but the difference is marginal over time. CONCLUSIONS: Staff needed to adapt their working practices significantly and felt unprepared for new ways of working with potentially significant implications for the nature of teamwork in the longer term. Staff preference remained for a mix of single rooms and bays. Patients preferred single rooms.
AU  - Maben,J
AU  - Griffiths,P
AU  - Penfold,C
AU  - Simon,M
AU  - Anderson,JE
AU  - Robert,G
AU  - Pizzo,E
AU  - Hughes,J
AU  - Murrells,T
AU  - Barlow,J
DO  - 10.1136/bmjqs-2015-004265
EP  - 256
PY  - 2015///
SN  - 2044-5423
SP  - 241
TI  - One size fits all? Mixed methods evaluation of the impact of 100% single-room accommodation on staff and patient experience, safety and costs.
T2  - BMJ Quality & Safety
UR  - http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2015-004265
UR  - http://hdl.handle.net/10044/1/29347
VL  - 25
ER  -
Download