ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026
Comparative case study on the implementation of the multi- space concept in a healthcare facility: study protocol.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Modern healthcare organizations face increasing psychosocial and organizational demands driven by digitalization, flexible work models, and rising workload. In large university hospitals such as the Medical Center - University of Freiburg, administrative and clinical staff work in highly complex, interdisciplinary environments where well-being, performance, and patient care are closely linked. The physical office environment plays a crucial role in shaping employees' well-being, motivation, and health. To meet the high cooperative demands in medical centers, multi-space offices are introduced to support collaboration, flexibility, and efficiency. However, their effects in clinical settings remain unclear. The scarce existing research shows inconsistent findings regarding productivity, satisfaction, privacy, and health outcomes. Thus, there is a need for systematic, empirical studies that investigate how office design influences work processes, well-being, and long-term psychosomatic health outcomes among hospital employees. Methods: The presented study applies a mixed-methods comparative case design. Two office types are compared: Multi-space offices with activity-based workspaces and traditional closed offices with assigned individual or shared rooms. Participants are employees from different professional groups (e.g., physicians, administrative staff) working in these offices ( Conclusion: This study addresses a key gap in healthcare research by systematically examining how multi-space office concepts influence work processes, psychosocial risk and protective factors, as well as employees' well-being in clinical settings. By linking spatial design with organizational and individual factors, it contributes evidence needed to improve workplace conditions in highly demanding healthcare environments. The use of multiple data sources and analytical strategies allows for the examination of complex relationships between variables. These insights can guide evidence-based decisions on office design and preventive measures to enhance sustainable work environments in healthcare. Clinical trial registration: https://drks.de/search/de/trial/DRKS00037660/details, identifier DRKS00037660.
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.