“Artificial But Better Than Nothing”

Abstract

Objective: To investigate patient, staff, and carer responses to an environmental intervention in an oncology clinic waiting room and evaluate the acceptability of artificial plant materials. Design Postintervention: Cross-sectional survey study. Setting: Oncology outpatient clinic waiting room located in a metropolitan comprehensive cancer center in Australia. Main Outcome Measure: Observer ratings of perceived qualities and effects of lifelike (fake) plants while spending time in the waiting room. Participants: Convenience sample ( N = 143) consisted of 73 cancer patients, 13 staff, 52 carers, and 5 “others” aged between 24 and 89 years ( M = 56, SD = 14.5). Intervention: Artificial plant arrangements, hanging installations, two movable green walls, and one rock garden on wheels placed throughout the outpatients’ clinic waiting room. Results: Eighty-one percent (115/142) of respondents noticed the green features when first entering the waiting room and 67% (90/134) noticed they were artificial. Eighty-one percent (115/142) indicated “like/like a lot” when reporting their first reaction to the green features. Forty-eight percent (68/143) were positively affected and 23% (33/143) were very positively affected. Eighty-one percent (110/135) agreed/strongly agreed that “The greenery brightens the waiting room,” 62% (80/130) agreed/strongly agreed that they “prefer living plants,” and 76% (101/133) agreed/strongly agreed that “‘lifelike’ plants are better than no plants.” Comments included mostly positive appraisals and occasional adverse reactions to artificial plants. No significant differences were found between patients’, staff, and carers’ reactions. Conclusions: The environmental intervention positively impacted patients’, staff, and carers’ perceptions of the oncology waiting room environment. Patients, staff, and carers mostly accepted artificial plants as an alternative design solution to real plants.