Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2018 Sep 27:15:E117.
doi: 10.5888/pcd15.180128.

Design Thinking in Health Care

Myra Altman  1   2   3 , Terry T K Huang  4 , Jessica Y Breland  2
Affiliations
Review

Design Thinking in Health Care

Myra Altman et al. Prev Chronic Dis. .

Abstract

Introduction: Applying Design Thinking to health care could enhance innovation, efficiency, and effectiveness by increasing focus on patient and provider needs. The objective of this review is to determine how Design Thinking has been used in health care and whether it is effective.

Methods: We searched online databases (PubMed, Medline, Web of Science, CINAHL, and PyscINFO) for articles published through March 31, 2017, using the terms "health," "health care," or "healthcare"; and "Design Thinking," "design science," "design approach," "user centered design," or "human centered design." Studies were included if they were written in English, were published in a peer-reviewed journal, provided outcome data on a health-related intervention, and used Design Thinking in intervention development, implementation, or both. Data were collected on target users, health conditions, intervention, Design Thinking approach, study design or sample, and health outcomes. Studies were categorized as being successful (all outcomes improved), having mixed success (at least one outcome improved), or being not successful (no outcomes improved).

Results: Twenty-four studies using Design Thinking were included across 19 physical health conditions, 2 mental health conditions, and 3 systems processes. Twelve were successful, 11 reported mixed success, and one was not successful. All 4 studies comparing Design Thinking interventions to traditional interventions showed greater satisfaction, usability, and effectiveness.

Conclusion: Design Thinking is being used in varied health care settings and conditions, although application varies. Design Thinking may result in usable, acceptable, and effective interventions, although there are methodological and quality limitations. More research is needed, including studies to isolate critical components of Design Thinking and compare Design Thinking-based interventions with traditionally developed interventions.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Design Thinking process, stages of design thinking and examples of exercises used and questions asked in each stage, systematic review on Design Thinking in health care, search results through March 31, 2017.
Figure 2
Figure 2
PRISMA 2009 flow diagram, systematic review on Design Thinking in health care, search results through March 31, 2017.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. MacFadyen JS. Design thinking. Holist Nurs Pract 2014;28(1):3–5. 10.1097/HNP.0000000000000008 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Roberts JP, Fisher TR, Trowbridge MJ, Bent C. A design thinking framework for healthcare management and innovation. Healthc (Amst) 2016;4(1):11–4. 10.1016/j.hjdsi.2015.12.002 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Searl MM, Borgi L, Chemali Z. It is time to talk about people: a human-centered healthcare system. Health Res Policy Syst 2010;8(1):35. 10.1186/1478-4505-8-35 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Lyon AR, Koerner K. User-centered design for psychosocial intervention development and implementation. Clin Psychol (New York) 2016;23(2):180–200. 10.1111/cpsp.12154 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Munro CL, Savel RH. Narrowing the 17-year research to practice gap. Am J Crit Care 2016;25(3):194–6. 10.4037/ajcc2016449 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types