Design Thinking y su uso para promover la seguridad de los pacientes: revisión de alcance

IF 1.1 Q4 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
L. Del-Valle Quintana , K. Sichieri , S. Secoli
{"title":"Design Thinking y su uso para promover la seguridad de los pacientes: revisión de alcance","authors":"L. Del-Valle Quintana ,&nbsp;K. Sichieri ,&nbsp;S. Secoli","doi":"10.1016/j.jhqr.2025.101140","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background and objective</h3><div>Design Thinking is a user centered methodology used to address problems through innovation. Patient safety is a complex issue within healthcare and remains a global priority. International organizations urge the development of joint strategies to tackle this challenge. The objective was to map the current use of Design Thinking as a methodology to promote patient safety in healthcare settings.</div></div><div><h3>Materials and methods</h3><div>A scoping review was conducted following the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines, using indexed databases such as PubMed, CINAHL, WOS, EMBASE, Scopus, Science Direct, PsycINFO, SciELO, and ERIC, as well as grey literature from CAPES and ProQuest journals. The protocol was registered in Open Science Framework. Data were analyzed and summarized narratively.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>A total of 55 publications applying Design Thinking in the context of patient safety were included. The six international patient safety goals were addressed, with a focus on effective communication (45%) and medication safety (35%). The study design was not reported in 65% of the cases, and 30% lacked data procedures and analysis. The healthcare team participated in 93% of the studies, while patients were involved in 44%. The most common solutions were mobile applications, software, and dashboards.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Design Thinking is contributing to improvements in patient safety by developing co-designed solutions, particularly in the international patient safety goals of communication and medication safety. However, the lack of a rigorous methodological approach limits the validity and replicability of the results.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":37347,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Healthcare Quality Research","volume":"40 4","pages":"Article 101140"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Healthcare Quality Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2603647925000521","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and objective

Design Thinking is a user centered methodology used to address problems through innovation. Patient safety is a complex issue within healthcare and remains a global priority. International organizations urge the development of joint strategies to tackle this challenge. The objective was to map the current use of Design Thinking as a methodology to promote patient safety in healthcare settings.

Materials and methods

A scoping review was conducted following the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines, using indexed databases such as PubMed, CINAHL, WOS, EMBASE, Scopus, Science Direct, PsycINFO, SciELO, and ERIC, as well as grey literature from CAPES and ProQuest journals. The protocol was registered in Open Science Framework. Data were analyzed and summarized narratively.

Results

A total of 55 publications applying Design Thinking in the context of patient safety were included. The six international patient safety goals were addressed, with a focus on effective communication (45%) and medication safety (35%). The study design was not reported in 65% of the cases, and 30% lacked data procedures and analysis. The healthcare team participated in 93% of the studies, while patients were involved in 44%. The most common solutions were mobile applications, software, and dashboards.

Conclusions

Design Thinking is contributing to improvements in patient safety by developing co-designed solutions, particularly in the international patient safety goals of communication and medication safety. However, the lack of a rigorous methodological approach limits the validity and replicability of the results.
设计思维及其在促进患者安全方面的应用:范围回顾
背景和目的设计思维是一种以用户为中心的方法,通过创新来解决问题。患者安全是医疗保健领域的一个复杂问题,也是全球优先考虑的问题。国际组织敦促制定应对这一挑战的联合战略。目的是绘制设计思维作为一种方法的当前使用情况,以促进医疗保健环境中的患者安全。材料和方法根据Joanna Briggs研究所的指南,使用PubMed、CINAHL、WOS、EMBASE、Scopus、Science Direct、PsycINFO、SciELO和ERIC等索引数据库以及CAPES和ProQuest期刊的灰色文献进行了范围审查。该方案已在开放科学框架中注册。对数据进行分析和叙述总结。结果共纳入55篇将设计思维应用于患者安全的文献。解决了6个国际患者安全目标,重点是有效沟通(45%)和药物安全(35%)。65%的病例没有报告研究设计,30%缺乏数据程序和分析。医疗团队参与了93%的研究,而患者参与了44%。最常见的解决方案是移动应用程序、软件和仪表板。通过开发共同设计的解决方案,设计思维有助于改善患者安全,特别是在通信和药物安全的国际患者安全目标方面。然而,缺乏严格的方法方法限制了结果的有效性和可重复性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
8.30%
发文量
83
审稿时长
57 days
期刊介绍: Revista de Calidad Asistencial (Quality Healthcare) (RCA) is the official Journal of the Spanish Society of Quality Healthcare (Sociedad Española de Calidad Asistencial) (SECA) and is a tool for the dissemination of knowledge and reflection for the quality management of health services in Primary Care, as well as in Hospitals. It publishes articles associated with any aspect of research in the field of public health and health administration, including health education, epidemiology, medical statistics, health information, health economics, quality management, and health policies. The Journal publishes 6 issues, exclusively in electronic format. The Journal publishes, in Spanish, Original works, Special and Review Articles, as well as other sections. Articles are subjected to a rigorous, double blind, review process (peer review)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信