SpaceMed Newsletter

Healthcare Facility Planning Tools and Guidelines

Volume 2, Number 3

 

Summer 2009

 

 

 

In This Issue

Newsletter Sign Up

 

 

Newsletter Archive

SpaceMed Home

About the Author

Planning Clinic Space: Considering Two Different Approaches

Digital Physician Visits Are Slowly Gaining Traction  

Increasing Regulations for Surgery Performed in Physician Offices 

The Physician Can be in Two Places at Once With Remote Presence and the InTouch Robot

Estimating the Space Need for Central Sterile Processing

Feature                                                                                                   Print (PDF)

Planning Clinic Space: Considering Two Different Approaches

BACKGROUND

University Hospital (UH) planned to replace several outpatient clinics in a new freestanding building. Although the current number of annual visits (30,000) was not expected to grow significantly in the near future, three different locations were currently in operation which was perceived to result in operational as well as space inefficiencies. There was considerable debate among the physician leadership regarding the planning of the new facility. Some wished to maintain the status quo regarding their current productivity and wanted to simply replace the three separate clinics in new construction. Others wanted to consolidate the clinics into a single, efficient ambulatory care space ― recognizing that reducing their staff and facility costs would make them more profitable while potentially improving customer service with more streamlined and better coordinated processes. The physician leadership agreed to evaluate the impact on overall space need (and resulting construction cost) of planning a “lean” facility versus a more “generous” facility.

PLANNING APPROACH

A number of factors were identified that would ultimately impact the overall size of the new clinic facility as follows:

  • Annual visits per exam room. Currently, the three clinics averaged only 1,000 annual visits per exam room. By extending clinic hours into the early evening (and possibly Saturday) and leveling out the scheduling of physician and resident clinic sessions during the week, a target of 1,650 annual visits per exam room was deemed appropriate.

  • Number of exam rooms. A total of 30 exam rooms were currently used within the three locations; only 18 exam rooms would be needed if annual visits per exam room were increased.

  • Exam rooms per module. Two modules of nine exam rooms each ― versus the current clinic configuration of four modules with six to eight exam rooms per module ― was considered for the new facility. Using two modules in lieu of the current four, results in a reduction of the overall department net square feet (NSF) by providing shared patient intake/reception space, staff amenities, and other support space.

  • NSF per exam room. Alternate exam room layouts were considered as the clinic "standard" ranging from a more compact exam room with 95 net square feet (NSF) to a more spacious exam room at 120 NSF.

  • NSF to DGSF factor. Alternate clinic layouts were evaluated that resulted in varying amounts of department gross square feet (DGSF) to accommodate the projected NSF; the higher factor includes additional internal corridors to accommodate the three separate clinics.

  • DGSF to BGSF factor. Alternate architectural designs were evaluated that resulted in varying amounts of total building gross square feet (BGSF) ― the overall building “footprint” ― to accommodate the DGSF; the higher factor assumed an atrium, expanded lobby space, and additional space for shared public corridors, elevators/stairs, and mechanical/electrical equipment.

  • Annual visits per BGSF. The resulting annual visits per total BGSF varied from 3.1 in the lean model to only 1.4 in the generous model.

CALCULATION OF CLINIC SPACE FOR 30,000 ANNUAL VISITS

The comparison of the "lean" versus more "generous" approach to planning the clinic space is shown below:

 

LEAN

vs.

GENEROUS

Annual Visits

30,000

 

30,000

Annual Visits Per Exam Room

1,650

1,000

Number of Exam Rooms

18

30

Exam Rooms Per Module

8 to 12

6 to 8

NSF Per Exam Room

95

120

Total Department Net Square Feet

6,200

11,400

Total NSF to DGSF Ratio

1.30

1.45

Department Gross Square Feet (DGSF)

8,100

16,500

BGSF to DGSF Ratio

1.20

1.30

   Total Building Gross Square Feet (BGSF)

9,700

vs.

21,500

   Annual Visits Per BGSF

3.1

1.4

 

CONCLUSION

Using the lean approach, operational processes would be reengineered to improve exam room utilization thus increasing the average annual visits per exam room. By combining three distinct clinics into a single flexible space, only 18 exam rooms would be required in lieu of the 30 at present. The current exam room size of 95 NSF was used in the lean model versus planning all the new exam rooms at 120 NSF. The more generous space layout required additional internal corridors to accommodate the three separate clinics resulting in a larger NSF to DGSF factor. A larger DGSF to BGSF factor was required with the more generous approach to accommodate an atrium, expanded lobby space, and additional space for shared public corridors, elevators/stairs, and mechanical space due to the larger footprint.

Assuming an overall project cost of approximately $200 per BGSF, the generous approach would require $2.4 million more (over two times as much) to construct the new clinic building than with the lean approach. Ultimately, the physician leadership decided to consolidate the three clinics using the lean approach which they felt would both increase their profitability and improve customer service. They decided, however, to increase the size of the exam rooms to 110 NSF to accommodate a desktop computer workstation as they transitioned to electronic data entry.  back to top

Cynthia Hayward, AIA, ACHA, FAAHC

Principal

Hayward & Associates LLC

chayward@hayward-assoc.com

In the News

 

Digital Physician Visits Are Slowly Gaining Traction

OVERVIEW

Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Florida was the first in the state to make an e-visit a billable service. Now about 1,000 healthcare providers have signed up for the service and the number of enrolled patients has grown to more than 600,000. Yet despite significant gains in online communications with patients, physicians have been slow to embrace technology that puts a computer screen between them and a patient when treatment is required.

The most common digital physician services include scheduling appointments, sending lab results, prescribing medications, and paying bills. According to Manhattan Research LLC, nearly 40 percent of physicians surveyed by the company said they have communicated with patients digitally this year.

LIMITATIONS

The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act in 2006 created lengthy policies and procedures to protect patient health information. Providers must take certain precautions to protect patient information being transmitted electronically. Because of this, physicians do not use commonly available Web-conferencing software. Instead, they may have to go through an insurer or another provider with software that meets the security requirements.

Physicians are also concerned with malpractice liability, disruptions to the typical office work flow, and limitations to what kinds of ailments can be treated online that are either self-imposed or specified by the American Medical Association. For example, a physician may schedule an e-visit with an established patient but not with one who has not been seen in over a year. Another physician may be willing to treat only minor ailments like the flu.

The Mayo Clinic Florida has been using Web conferencing and digital communications for about three years but only between two physicians and most often when the patient is out of the U.S. and is seeking a second opinion.

Blue Cross has not yet proven it can reduce medical costs but it is hoping more insurance companies will pay for e-visits with the transition to electronic medical records.

COMPLETE ARTICLE

The complete article "Digital Visits Slowly Gaining Traction" is from the Jacksonville Business Journal, July 17, 2009. back to top

Trendline                                                                                              Print (PDF)

Increasing Regulations fro Surgery Performed in Physician Offices

BACKGROUND

Outpatient surgery ― from the removal of lumps and bumps to knee repairs ― accounts for more than 65% of all surgeries in the U.S. Due to the development of shorter-acting anesthesia and minimally-invasive surgical techniques, a significant amount of outpatient surgery has shifted from the hospital-based surgery suite to outpatient facilities and physician offices over the past two decades. These outpatient settings typically offer more convenient scheduling, improved patient access, and lower costs. About 45% of these procedures occur in hospital-based outpatient facilities which are operated by highly regulated hospitals. An additional 38% of these procedures are performed in more than 5,000 ambulatory surgery centers which are typically certified by the federal Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services, are accredited by an independent agency, and may also have to be licensed by their state. To be accredited, facilities must meet stringent standards for equipment, operating room safety, personnel training, and surgeon credentials. Physicians in states with no regulations may perform surgery solely under the physician’s medical license with no formal licensing or accreditation requirements. Some physicians may choose to be voluntarily accredited by one of three agencies that perform the inspections, but the process can be costly.

Some facilities that call themselves “surgery centers” are often nothing more than glorified physician offices that are not accredited or certified by Medicare. For example, to qualify as an ambulatory surgery center, a facility cannot share waiting space or other business operations with non-surgical patients and additional quality control processes for anesthesia and a formal backup procedure for medical emergencies are required.

CURRENT TREND

Due to some highly publicized cases where a patient died while undergoing surgery in a physician’s office, states are beginning to regulate the estimated 35,000 to 45,000 physician offices in the U.S. that also perform surgical procedures ― representing about 17% of all outpatient surgical procedures. Only a fraction of these physician offices are accredited. California, New York, Florida, Indiana, Nevada, and Arizona are now regulating these procedures. For example, in New York, the state’s roughly 3,000 physician offices that perform surgery under moderate to deep sedation must have their facilities inspected and accredited by independent review agencies or face penalties from the New York state medical board.

CONCLUSION

This may force physician to rethink performing surgery in their offices and result in the transition of the. back to top

Cynthia Hayward, AIA, ACHA, FAAHC

Principal

Hayward & Associates LLC

chayward@hayward-assoc.com

Technology

 

The Physician Can Be in Two Places at Once With Remote Telepresence and the InTouch Robot

Remote presence is the ability to project yourself to another location (without leaving your current location) and to move, see, hear and talk as though you were actually there. Wherever access to medical expertise is limited, remote presence can effectively extend the physician's reach to manage patient care, thereby removing time and distance barriers. Remote presence technology can be applied across the entire continuum of healthcare, from primary care to outpatient care, retail clinics to emergency services, acute care, rehabilitation, and long term care. With the InTouch Health robot, physicians can make informed decisions about patient care from any remote location.

HOW IT WORKS

InTouch Health's family of RP-7 robots are wireless, mobile, remote presence robots that allow the physician to be in "two places at once." Under the direct control of a remote physician seated at a control station, the robot can move untethered allowing the physician to freely interact with patients, family members, and hospital staff from anywhere, anytime. The InTouch robot is the only FDA-approved remote presence technology that uniquely enables physicians to connect to FDA-cleared medical devices such as electronic stethoscopes, otoscopes, EKG machines, and ultrasound.

The remote physician controls the RP-7 robot and interacts within the healthcare facility via the use of a specialized computer. Both the robot and the control station are linked via a secure combination of broadband, the Internet, and wireless technology. Options include a portable laptop that enables the physician to access the RP-7 robot through most high-speed Internet connections to provide care at a moment's notice. The user can simultaneously access RP-7 and the patient's electronic medical information by toggling between views. A desktop control station is also available with a dual-monitor which is ideal for a home or office setting. It also allows a physician to simultaneously view electronic medical information while using the robot. back to top

Additional information can be found at InTouch Health website.  

Rule-of-Thumb

 

Estimating the Space Ned for Central Sterile Processing

 

Description

Estimated
Department
Gross Square
Feet (DGSF)

Comments

     

Minimal

(Two Steam/Gas Sterilizers)

2,000 to 3,200 DGSF
 

The lower range would be used for a central sterile processing function that is contiguous with the surgery suite; the higher range would accommodate a case cart system,  the storage of hospital-wide patient equipment, and/or the use of specialized sterilization techniques.

 

Average

(Two Steam and One
Gas Sterilizer)

3,200 to 4,500 DGSF

Large

(Three Steam and One
Gas Sterilizer)

4,500 to 5,500 DGSF

     
 

 

 

 

Note: DGSF represents the "footprint" of a department or functional area and includes the net square feet of the individual rooms as well as the space occupied by internal circulation corridors, walls/partition, and minor utility shafts; DGSF excludes common areas such as shared public corridors and lobbies, elevator banks, stairwells, major mechanical spaces, and the space occupied by the building's exterior wall.

Source: SpaceMed Guide (Second Edition).                                                   

back to top

www.spacemed.com

Copyright ©2009 SpaceMed. All rights reserved.