Rapid Service Design for Healthcare Facilities in the COVID-19 Context: Methodological Approaches to User Research, Analysis, Design and Evaluation
Main Article Content
Abstract
Background: The demand for rapid service design in the medical field has increased due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Concurrently, the deployment of service robots is expected to alleviate the chronic shortage of nurses. However, introducing new technologies necessitates behavioral changes among users, which presents a barrier to implementation. This study aims to develop a rapid and effective service design method to address these challenges.
Methodology: This study introduces a new service design method that integrates Rapid Ethnography and Behavioral Design. The method comprises four steps: research, analysis, design, and evaluation. In the research phase, we focus on the roles of the main information provider and the three institutional elements (regulative, normative, cultural-cognitive). In the analysis phase, data is examined using qualitative text analysis. The design phase involves creating new services based on existing jobs, using the identified institutional elements as constraints. In the evaluation phase, the CREATE action funnel is used to assess psychological barriers to service adoption.
Results: Utilizing the proposed method, we designed and implemented two services (hospital room and examination room guidance) at Shonan Kamakura General Hospital within approximately two months. During the demonstration experiment, we evaluated the services with two nurses. Although several user interface and user experiece improvement points were identified, the service concepts received positive feedback. Additionally, there was potential for operation by non-nursing staff, and the services were expected to reduce the workload of nurses.
Conclusion: The rapid service design method proposed in this study demonstrated that it is possible to effectively design and implement services that consider behavioral changes during emergencies such as the COVID-19 pandemic. However, limitations exist, including the absence of patient-side evaluation data, the evaluation at a single facility, and the lack of long-term effect validation. Future studies should aim to improve the method's effectiveness and generalizability through verification at various medical facilities and the measurement of long-term outcomes. This method also holds potential for application in new public and corporate services outside the medical field, warranting further research.
Article Details
The Medical Research Archives grants authors the right to publish and reproduce the unrevised contribution in whole or in part at any time and in any form for any scholarly non-commercial purpose with the condition that all publications of the contribution include a full citation to the journal as published by the Medical Research Archives.
References
2. Wang S, Wen X, Dong Y, Liu B, Cui M. Psychological Influence of Coronovirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic on the General Public, Medical Workers, and Patients With Mental Disorders and its Countermeasures. Psychosomatics. 2020; 61(6):616-624. doi:10.1016/j.psym.2020.05.005
3. CDC. Interim Infection Prevention and Control Recommendations for Healthcare Personnel During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic. Published 2022. Accessed September 17, 2022. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/infection-control-recommendations.html
4. Millen DR. Rapid Ethnography: Time Deepening Strategies for HCI Field Research. In: Proceedings of the 3rd Conference on Designing Interactive Systems: Processes, Practices, Methods, and Techniques. DIS ’00. Association for Computing Machinery; 2000:280–286. doi:10.1145/347642.34 7763
5. Vindrola-Padros C, Vindrola-Padros B. Quick and dirty? A systematic review of the use of rapid ethnographies in healthcare organisation and delivery. BMJ Qual \& Saf. 2018;27(4):321-330. doi:10.1136/bmjqs-2017-007226
6. Cupit C, Mackintosh N, Armstrong N. Using ethnography to study improving healthcare: reflections on the {\textquoteleft}ethnographic{\textquoteright} label. BMJ Qual \& Saf. 2018;27(4):258-260.
doi:10.1136/bmjqs-2017-007599
7. Ackerman SL, Sarkar U, Tieu L, Handley MA, Schillinger D, Hahn K, Hoskote M, Gourley G, Lyles C. Meaningful use in the safety net: a rapid ethnography of patient portal implementation at five community health centers in California. J Am Med Informatics Assoc. 2017;24(5):903-912. doi:10.1093/jamia/ocx015
8. Rapport F, Smith J, Hutchinson K, Clay-Williams R, Churruca K, Bierbaum M, Braithwaite J. Too much theory and not enough practice? The challenge of implementation science application in healthcare practice. J Eval Clin Pract. Published online July 2021. doi:10.1111/jep.13600
9. Ranabahu N. “Rapid” but not “raid”: A reflection on the use of rapid ethnography in entrepreneurship research. Qual Res J. 2017;17 (4):254-264. doi:10.1108/QRJ-12-2015-0098
10. Khambete P, Sabnis G, Jain A. Blending Rapid Ethnography and Grounded Theory for Service Experience Design in Organizational Setting: Design of a Peer to Peer Social Micro-Lending Service BT - Research into Design for Communities, Volume 1. In: Chakrabarti A, Chakrabarti D, eds. Springer Singapore; 2017:117-131.
11. Vänni KJ, Salin SE. A Need for Service Robots Among Health Care Professionals in Hospitals and Housing Services BT - Social Robotics. In: Kheddar A, Yoshida E, Ge SS, Suzuki K, Cabibihan J-J, Eyssel F, He H, eds. Springer International Publishing; 2017:178-187.
12. Holland J, Kingston L, McCarthy C, Armstrong E, O’Dwyer P, Merz F, McConnell M. Service Robots in the Healthcare Sector. Robotics. 2021;10(1). doi:10.3390/robotics10010047
13. Smith A. Older Adults and Technology Use. Pew Research Center. Published 2015. Accessed April 5, 2020.
http://www.pewinternet.org/2014/04/03/older-adults-and-technology-use/
14. Broadbent E, Stafford R, Macdonald B. Acceptance of healthcare robots for the older population: review and future directions. Int J Soc Robot Vol. 2009;1(4):319-330.
15. International Federation of Robotics. World Robotics Survey: service robots are conquering the world. Published 2015. Accessed April 5, 2020. https://ifr.org/news/world-robotics-survey-service-robots-are-conquering-the-world-/
16. McNall MA, Welch VE, Ruh KL, Mildner CA, Soto T. The use of rapid-feedback evaluation methods to improve the retention rates of an HIV/AIDS healthcare intervention. Eval Program Plann. 2004; 27(3):287-294. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2004.04.003
17. McNall M, Foster-Fishman PG. Methods of Rapid Evaluation, Assessment, and Appraisal. Am J Eval. 2007;28(2):151-168. doi:10.1177/10982140 07300895
18. Adi B Tedjasaputra ERS. Supporting rapid ethnography for HCI field research with pair writing. In: Proceedings of HCII 2005. ; 2005:22-27.
19. ISO. ISO 9241-210:2019 Ergonomics of human-system interaction — Part 210: Human-centred design for interactive systems. Published 2019. Accessed October 1, 2023. https://www.iso.org/standard/77520.html
20. Stickdorn M, Hormess ME, Lawrence A, Schneider J. This Is Service Design Methods: A Companion to This Is Service Design Doing. O’Reilly Media, Inc.; 2018.
21. Segelström F, Raijmakers B, Holmlid S. Thinking and Doing Ethnography in Service Design. Published online January 1, 2009.
22. Banfield R, Lombardo CT, Wax T. Design Sprint: A Practical Guidebook for Building Great Digital Products. 1st ed. O’Reilly Media, Inc.; 2015.
23. Rodin D, Lovas M, Berlin A. The reality of virtual care: Implications for cancer care beyond the pandemic. Healthc (Amsterdam, Netherlands). 2020;8(4):100480. doi:10.1016/j.hjdsi.2020.100480
24. Design Council. What is the framework for innovation? Design Council’s evolved Double Diamond. Published 2019. Accessed April 19, 2020. https://www.designcouncil.org.uk/news-opinion/what-framework-innovation-design-councils-evolved-double-diamond
25. Wendel S. Designing for Behavior Change. O’Reilly Media, Inc.; 2013.
26. Takeyama M, Tsukui K, Yamaguchi H, Sasaki A, Miyashita S. Designing for behavioural and institutional changes. In: ServDes 2020. ; 2020:341-353.
27. Vink J. In/visible - Conceptualizing Service Ecosystem Design. Published online 2019.
http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=diva2%3A1313628&dswid=887
28. Palthe J. Regulative, Normative, and Cognitive Elements of Organizations- Implications for Managing Change. Manag Organ Stud. 2014; 1(2):59-66.
29. Tokuhisa S, Morimoto T. Service design method for both non-human and human actors: What kinds of jobs should be assigned to service robots? J Des Bus & Soc. 2020;7(2):141-163. doi:https://doi.org/10.1386/dbs_00025_1
30. Datta S, Mullainathan S. Behavioral Design: A New Approach to Development Policy. Rev Income Wealth. 2014;60(1):7-35. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/roiw.12093
31. Lockton D, Harrison D, Stanton NA. The Design with Intent Method: A design tool for influencing user behaviour. Appl Ergon. 2010;41 (3):382-392. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2009.09.001
32. Cooper A, Reimann R. About Face: The Essentials of Interaction Design. Wiley; 4 edition; 2014.
33. Angrave J. The Journey Mapping Playbook: A Practical Guide to Preparing, Facilitating and Unlocking the Value of Customer Journey Mapping. De Gruyter; 2020.
34. Shostack GL. Designing Services That Deliver. Harv Bus Rev. 1984;62(1):133-139.
35. Kuckartz U. Qualitative Text Analysis: A Guide to Methods, Practice & Using Software. SAGE Publications Ltd; 2014.
36. Toppan. Toppan’s TransBotsTM Digital Twin Solution Enables Centralized Control of Multiple Robots of Different Types. Published 2021. Accessed September 17, 2022.
https://www.holdings.toppan.com/en/transbots/
37. Ministry of Health Labour and Welfare. The Sixth Report of the Study Group on the Supply-Demand Outlook for Nursing Staff (Summary) (only in Japanese). Published 2005. Accessed September 17, 2022.
https://www.mhlw.go.jp/shingi/2005/12/s1226-5.html
38. Ministry of Health Labour and Welfare. The Seventh Report of the Study Group on the Supply-Demand Outlook for Nursing Staff (Summary) (only in Japanese). Published 2010. Accessed September 17, 2022.
https://www.mhlw.go.jp/stf/shingi/2r9852000000z6kk-att/2r9852000000z6o7.pdf
39. Nurse Specialist. Information for new hires in April 2022 (originally in Japanese). Published 2022. Accessed September 17, 2022. https://recruit.nurse-senka.com/establishment/2010808/data
40. OhmniLabs. Ohmni telepresence robots. Published 2022. Accessed September 17, 2022. https://store.ohmnilabs.com/collections/frontpage
41. temi. temi 3. Published 2022. Accessed September 17, 2022.
https://www.robotemi.com/robots/
42. Cooper A, Goodwin K. Designing for the Digital Age: How to Create Human-Centered Products and Services. Wiley; 2009.
43. Holtzblatt K, Beyer H. Contextual Design, Second Edition: Design for Life (Interactive Technologies). Morgan Kaufmann; 2016.
44. Eberle B. Scamper: Games for Imagination Development. Prufrock Press Inc; 1971.
45. Crawford RP. Direct Creativity with Attribute Listing. Fraser Publishing; 1964.
46. Altshuller G. And Suddenly the Inventor Appeared: Triz, the Theory of Inventive Problem Solving. Technical Innovation Center, Inc.; 1996.
47. Osterwalder A, Pigneur Y. Business Model Generation: A Handbook for Visionaries, Game Changers, and Challengers. Wiley; 2010.
48. Maurya A. Running Lean: Iterate from Plan A to a Plan That Works. O’Reilly Media, Incorporated; 2012. https://books.google.co.jp/books?id=j4hXPn233UYC