ArticleHERD2026
Patients' Experiences of the Transition to a 100% Single-Occupancy Patient Room Hospital in the Netherlands.
Article in HERD, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
ObjectivesOur study examines experiences of patients admitted to multibedded patient rooms in a former hospital building, compared to patients' experiences in single-occupancy patient rooms (SPRs) in a new hospital building, designed according to principles of a healing environment.BackgroundTo improve patients' privacy, comfort and infection control, newly built hospitals increasingly accommodate patients in SPRs.MethodsIn a single-center, before-after study, patients completed a questionnaire of 40 items in four domains: privacy, sanitary facilities, patient room and ward layout. This substudy was embedded within the WELCOME study.ResultsA total of 227 participants were involved in the before-measurement and 416 in the after-measurement. Patients considered the SPRs better in terms of privacy; more than 90% of participants (strongly) agreed with the privacy-related questionnaire items. Sanitary facilities, patient rooms and ward layout were also rated higher in the new hospital building. For most questionnaire items pertaining to these domains, more than 80% of patients in the new facility (strongly) agreed. 23.5% of respondents in the new building reported missing the companionship of fellow patients.ConclusionsPatients rated the 100% single-occupancy ward configuration more favorably than the former multi-occupancy layout, with enhanced privacy emerging as an important advantage. However, this same privacy can leave some patients feeling isolated. Future studies should explore targeted interventions-such as structured social activities or volunteer-led engagement-to mitigate loneliness and promote mobilization, while preserving the established benefits of SPRs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.