Space, Wellness, and Wellbeing

Introduction

Much contemporary literature identifies a connection between the design of Healthcare with the promotion of wellbeing. Most interestingly, a statement by Terry Montgomery in Architectural Design in 20171 highlights the term ‘in-between’ space. He identified ‘in-between’ space as a crucial design consideration for patient experience in clinical environments. This led the firm to have a new design approach, enhancing patient wellbeing through emphasising the connection between inside-outside and public-private, the ‘in-between’ space.

‘In-between’ spaces are discussed by Kearns, Neuwelt, and Eggleton2 as a negotiation for a patient within the ‘under-examined’ areas such as the reception hall and waiting rooms. These spaces had a remarkable impact on patient experience due to the dealing activity between person’s needs with the institution protocol. Kearns, Neuwelt, and Eggleton3 propose ways to mitigate the stressful nature of Healthcare by rectifying the design of ‘in-between’ spaces.

Both texts discuss the relationship between healthcare design and patient experience, mainly focusing on the ‘in-between’ space. Key questions within the research include: 1). To what extent can the experience happening within the ‘in-between’ space promote well-being? 2). How can designers shape the patient experience through tangible aspects to ensure a positive experience and promote wellbeing?

‘In-between’ spaces, such as waiting rooms, are an embodied experience4. The experience of transition through these spaces happens alongside institutional processes such as taking a seat in waiting room and standing beside reception desk. It’s a transaction between ‘clinical structure’ with ‘the patient need’ which mediates explicitly through the staff instruction or tacitly through the spatial design. The experience was also a part of patient perception, studies shown range of sensory experience experiments, such as citrus smell and visual distraction (artwork), powerfully influences the sense of satisfaction within healthcare5.

Phillip Vannini in Kearns et. al. argued that activity within in-between spaces has a huge chance of becoming. Waiting activity is a momentarily delay from activities, to recognise something which could assist more connection to the environment. ‘It’s alive with potential for being other than this6. It is not a static experience, it change of time and has possibilities to obtain perception of comfort or relaxation. It draws a potential pathways of place to wellbeing.

The relation of experience and wellbeing, explained by interior designer7, Elina Grigoriou and Francis Richard, 2019 in the book ‘Wellbeing for Interior Designers’. They define wellbeing as a state where there is a feeling of wellness and happiness in the body, the mind, and the emotion. It’s added that it could be achieved by aiming for beauty / harmonious design, but it is not an object; “it’s an experience”. This can happen in the negotiation of space and place, enabling a holistic interaction of physical, emotional, societal, and environment

The atmosphere and sense of space.

Gernot Bohme defines ‘atmosphere’ as the key to the mindful physical presence within a space, creating the sensation experience through the specific ‘generators of atmosphere’ tangible and intangible element.8 Along with the argument, Rebecca McLaughlan and Julie Willis propose an atmosphere of inclusivity to ensure a communicative hospital environment for its user.9 Emphasising evidence-based design McLaughlan and Willis identified the design of Royal Melbourne Hospital as ensembled visual cues that blend as a whole journey to the users. The architects intended the hospital to enable a strong sense of place that is capable of driving curiosity and discovery experience. In these findings, vision was the strong aspect of sense, made in the public spaces of hospitals through artwork. It had a positive response not only for the children targeted but fostering a conversation between the staff and family to interpret the painting, building a sense of connection.

Consistent with the findings of McLaughlan, a strong sense of space drives curiosity and fosters discovery and connectivity. Regarding the harmonious goal of well-being in the relation between people and place, Phillips et al were intrigued to have ‘curiosity’ as the catalyst to wellbeing. They found that curiosity can trigger attention, memory, and sensibility within a place.10

In healthcare design, treatment and recovery is a significant experience for individuals. Cameron Duff identifies an atmosphere of healing, in becoming well, that can have the atmosphere of sociality, safety, belonging, hope and belief.11

8 Böhme, G. “Atmosphere as Mindful Physical Presence in Space”. Building atmosphere, OASE, (91), (2013), 21–32. Retrieved from https://www. oasejournal.nl/en/Issues/91/AtmosphereAsMindfulPhysicalPresenceInSpace

9 McLaughlan, Rebecca, and Julie Willis. “Atmospheric Inclusiveness: Creating a Coherent and Relatable Sense of Place for a Children’s Hospital.” Journal of architecture (London, England) 26, no. 8 (2021): 1197–1218

10 Phillips, Evans, and Muirhead, “Curiosity”, 2348-2349

11 Cameron Duff, “Atmospheres of recovery: Assemblages of health,” Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space 48, no. 1 (2015), https://doi. org/10.1177/0308518x15603222.

Top :

The interior of Maggie’s Center in Leeds, a circullar tree shape kitchen wall.

Designed by Heatherwick Studio

Bottom:

Self sustaining Australia home, producing vegetable, fish, and where nature and beauty meet symbiotically

Designed by Clinton Cole (CplusCArchitectural workshop) & Interior Designer, Jase Sullivan

The atmosphere of sociality is placed in rich social connection activities; the atmosphere of safety and belonging mimics what the domestic environment does, feeling secure in a familiar place; The atmosphere of hope and belief is effectively transformative and face new aspect in time and space, like the feeling when looking at nature, which enables motivation.

12Martin, Daryl, Sarah Nettleton, and Christina Buse. “Affecting Care: Maggie’s Centres and the Orchestration of Architectural Atmospheres.” Social science & medicine (1982) 240 (2019): 112563–112563.

13Bjarregaard in Martin, Daryl, Sarah Nettleton, and Christina Buse. “Affecting Care: Maggie’s Centres,” 6.

14Martin, Daryl, Sarah Nettleton, and Christina Buse. “Affecting Care: Maggie’s Centres,”, 6.

15Böhme, G. “Atmosphere”, 27.

The deal for designers.

In-between space is often a transitional space where people receive their first impression of a place. In the Maggie’s Centers, non-residential care buildings dedicated to those with cancer, their family, and friend, people were attracted to the building even before experiencing the threshold of the entrance.12 This reinforces how important the momentary experience of entering a building is to staging its atmospheric qualities13, which leads to Böhme generators of atmosphere.

In the case of the Magie’s Centers in Leeds, the attractive shape and material of physical elements of the building (the wooden tree form) enable an exploration from different angles. The tactility of the materials provide a feeling of warmth from the timber. This user experience through the unusual shape of architecture triggered ‘curiosity’14 and one of the generators to the atmosphere.15 These elements within the spatial environment fosters attention to objects, triggers sense of space to evoking memories, and also influence happening conversation which advantages social engagement for building a supportive healthcare community.16

17Kearns, Neuwelt, and Eggleton, “Permeable boundaries?”, 3.

18Böhme, G. “Atmosphere”, 27.

19Ibid.

20Phillips, Evans, and Muirhead, “Curiosity”, 2349.

21Duff, “Atmospheres of recovery: Assemblages of health.”, 66.

22Ibid.

23Ibid, 73.

Identified through the literature, these critical findings of the physical environment and the affected atmosphere summarize in the table:

From the case studies, there are several samples of atmosphere generators found within ‘in-between’ spaces that affected the positive experience for the user. These could be tangible or intangible elements such as visual connection (permeability), unique shape and materials, and multi-sensory design. The generators mediating curiosity between objects to subjects (user) affecting experience in socio-psychological aspects supporting the recovery22. It set the goal to Healthcare design to create ‘Affective Recovery Atmosphere’ using experience in the ‘in-between’ spaces to permeate the comfort of ‘becoming well’23 and to reach the state of well-being.

Conclusion

The literature reviewed each promotes the idea that ‘In-between’ space plays a significant role in shaping the whole experience of place. This often to be the first encountered transitional space mediating patient needs with the ‘clinical structure’. There is a potential to enhance the spatial perception17 at the momentarily pause within ‘in-between’ activities to mitigate bad experiences. It allows the design to staging the atmosphere that supports well-being such as comfort. As mentioned by Elina Grigoriou and Francis Richard, the experience helps create a harmonious design to maintain happiness in body, mind, and emotion, as a pathway to experiencing wellbeing.

The key to shaping spatial perception lies in atmosphere and also sensation18. These can be generated through atmosphere ‘generators’19 that could enabling curiosity20. Curiosity itself can trigger attraction/attention which enables the sense of space to the atmosphere. It also provokes socio-psychological aspects such as evoking memory and driving social engagement. Therefore, Curiosity becomes the catalyst to develop the atmosphere of recovery to sociality, safety, belonging, hope, and belief.21

Major influence on Conceptual, Narrative, Programming, and Composition and Technology. These communities influence me most since I graduated from Architecture Degree.