Seating in Doctors’ Waiting Rooms: Has COVID-19 Changed Our Choices?

Author:

Devlin Ann Sloan1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Connecticut College, New London, CT, USA

Abstract

Objective: This study investigates preference for five different seating arrangements (e.g., rows, clusters) in a doctor’s office waiting room, whether these reduce stress and improve judgments of medical care, and how such choices may have changed over the pandemic (2013 vs. 2021). Background: What is called the doctor’s office layout, with chairs lining the perimeter of the waiting room, is criticized by designers, yet little empirical evidence exists to support that assessment. Method: Data collected in 2013 and 2021 used sketches of five different seating arrangements; people saw just one of these. The study examined the effect of time and seating arrangement on anxiety, need for privacy, situational awareness, evaluation of the environment, and perception of the doctor. Results: There was no significant impact of the seating arrangement on any of the dependent variables, but ratings were higher for situational awareness, need for privacy, evaluation of the environment, and aspects related to the physician in 2021. In addition, seating preferences favored end, not middle seats, and chair selections with the chair back to a wall. Conclusion: In this study, no evidence exists that the doctor’s office layout is less preferred than four other seating arrangements, but seat choice shows people prefer end seats (not middle seats) across arrangements. The doctor’s office layout may offer a supportive familiarity to people; also, given the percentage of people who visit the doctor unaccompanied, layouts designed to encourage social interaction may not always be appropriate.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine,Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

Cited by 4 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3