of everybody?

How do you know?

I.

How are you all doing?

Well, this is our last session of the Arctic Public Series this semester.

And we have doctor in my lab, Asia, joining us from the Arctic, from the University of Vienna, Austria.

So, why is, is an assistant professor and, Technical University of Vienna and county search and has been mainly focused on mobility supporting.

We have the location clinics or school functions.

And this is a research project that she did for her teaching and other ongoing projects.

She has for multiple national and international awards, including the Offer Environment Award in 2003 and also the European Cultural Design Awards in 2021.

So please help me welcome Doctor Maya.

I have one of.

So thank you for inviting me.

I'm very excited to present today, and, maybe I should share my screen first just to see if everything's working.

And can you see those?

I mean.

Can you see my screen?

Yes.

I don't hear anyone.

Oh.

You're good.

So you guys, can you see my screen?

Can.

Yes.

Yes.

Okay.

Sorry.

Okay, great.

Okay.

Perfect.

So thank you very much for the introduction.

I'm not sure what else to add to this.

Maybe I can just say that as I'm originally from Serbia and I studied architecture there, and then during my master's studies that I did in the Netherlands and got interested in healthcare design and my diploma project was a recommendation center.

And here I understood how much we actually don't know, and then got the interested in the research.

And that's how I ended up here at the end.

So I did my master's in the Netherlands, then PhD in Germany, and now I'm trying to establish a group focusing on how to design and I'm also, teaching, various courses where students, do their own research, maybe develop their own research topic, research question.

Then they decide the method, then they going to work behind the scenes to collect the.

So this is what I do.

And today I will be talking about the major part of my research, which is focusing on stroke and the built environment and how the environment in those or the supports, or promotes patients activity during the application.

I will also, talk a little bit about my current project, which is focusing on stroke as a rare disease in children, who is also very different from different topic, compared to other stroke.

And at the end, I will mention very briefly, a new study that I developed with my colleagues where we are testing quite an interesting methodology, and it's not related to stroke, but it might be interesting.

So I will start, I'm sure that you all know what the stroke is.

But what is important to note is that many of the for stroke impairments would be relevant to the design optimization environment, and also how patients experience them, such as motor impairments, cognitive impairments, even speech impairments if they need to read signs.

For example.

But they also can count by various visual and cognitive impairments.

And the main focus of my research so far was on motor in their body in the current projects.

I'm also looking into other impairments and how they might affect, patients with stroke experience.

Their environments.

And I think that it is important to start, by introducing the specificities of rehabilitation system for, neurological conditions in German speaking countries, because this might be different to what you know or what you are useful in, Germany and Austria.

Rehabilitation is organized in phases from eight to E, and they're sorted into these phases based on far field index.

I'm not sure if you're familiar with the Barthel index.

It is a scale from 0 to 100 that measures the abilities of a person in the activities of their living.

So you can get the score for each of these activities.

And then in the end, you get this for from 0 to 100.

And, phase eight, which you see here at the beginning is an acute phase.

And this takes place in the hospital or in the stroke humans.

And that you have these is B, C and d, where patients are already fairly mobile, let's say in phase B, sometimes they are still going to find the bed, but most of the times they are mobile.

They can use a wheelchair, a walker, or even walk.

And then in phase E they are usually at home.

And this is outpatient care.

So when I talk about the rehabilitation center, I'm talking about inpatients.

These are people who are staying there for some time now.

We'll come back to that.

As my research is mostly focused on radiation samples, I would like to briefly introduce what they are as facilities, because this might also differ across countries.

In Europe and in Austria, rehabilitation centers are places where patients stay after a stroke and after acute hospital stay, and usually as inpatients.

And this is usually for several weeks, sometimes several months.

And they are trying to recover the functions and and lost and their large multistory facilities.

Usually they have around 200 to 250 beds.

And the patients here undergo very intensive multidisciplinary therapy every day.

And to try to recover those lost functions and hopefully to return home and to be independent.

And on this slide, you can see some centers with very interesting architectural approaches from different European countries.

I'm sure that you already heard about the first one.

Then you have Basel and the one in the middle is in the Netherlands.

You do also very interesting concept of a rehab center.

Kind of nested inside the forest and trying to connect with nature, in different ways.

And then the last one you don't see so much outside.

It is also quite an interesting concept with different courtyards.

But, even though there's some really great examples, most rehabilitation centers actually face, quite big challenges in terms of architectural design.

And here I showed the examples of centers and I including my research.

These are only in Germany, actually.

And the first example, I like to show we can do this kind of a project building.

It started as a very tiny building for brain injured soldiers after World War Two.

And then it grew over time without any proper planning.

And this resulted in a very complicated structure.

Some parts of the building are even connected with the ramps because, and the bronze level was different.

So there was no really initial planning just grew over time as the needs increased for neurological condition.

Then the second one, was transformed from tuberculosis clinic.

So there are some leftovers here, such as green and dirty corridor, for example, which creates a very new mobility pattern for patients.

But it was not built for rehabilitation of neurological condition.

And then, for example, number three was purposely built but without any evidence based knowledge.

And this is a problem because, for example, in this center there are no communal rooms or spaces, there is only a lobby on the ground floor.

And then there are wards with their owners.

And it's not a green space for patients actually to spend a lot of their time there.

Just remember, they lived here for weeks or sometimes months.

So these are three main challenges that I noticed that the rehab centers were facing right now.

And I will also very quickly just introduce the spatial organization.

And this was going to be this is maybe important, when I talk about the research later, which, you know what I'm talking about, these diagrams, show that, these centers are usually organized around wards.

So, you know, wards or stations and then you have some functions that are shared by all of the wards, and therapy spaces can be scattered in different building areas and also on different floors, or they are concentrated in one building or on one floor is it really depends on the staffer.

So you can find different configurations.

As you can see on the right in these two libraries, most patients that are here in Beijing, now, underwent radiation, independently in mobile.

They're using a wheelchair or a walker sometimes, or maybe a walking stick or they're not using mobility.

Because they can walk and they're required to get therapies and meals on their own.

So they have to go on their own to reach the therapy from their room and back.

And, as I mentioned before, these patients, they are usually it's from 3 to 4 weeks.

This is what the insurance usually covers.

But, I also learned that patients will stay there much longer, even six months and longer.

And so it really depends on each individual case.

And on the right side you can see an overview of how their, daily schedule looks like.

So they have three meals and then they use their therapies.

And then after dinner there is some free time.

And, it will be almost in their free time.

Most of the patients just go to sleep.

So this is how their day looks like.

Okay.

So now I'll, start talking about my research.

And as I mentioned, I'm focusing on stroke patients and I'm focusing on rehabilitation environments, and I'm looking into how the built environment, supports and promotes mobility and activity around users.

And, I as I also mentioned before, most of my research focused on motor impairment, which you can see here on the left.

And later I will talk about my current project, which is focusing on other areas as well.

So I will talk about mostly in my PhD project because this is the a very large project where a lot of interesting findings came out of, and I hope this will be interesting to you.

The methods that I use, patients, family and patients survey and self serving here I included, the sheets, really the original sheets of my data collection just to show how that looked like.

Because when I tell people that I need patients shadowing, they don't really understand a lot of times what I need or how it looks like, because there are many ways to do a patient shadowing.

It is not so structured as, behavioral mapping, for example.

So here I showed just the plan of building and how I was making some notes around making some tiny sketches, writing the roots of patients and different numbers and then connecting those numbers in the time log.

Very also, wrote down what was happening, which you can see the people and in my research I included 70 patients.

They were all able to move independently so they could go out of their van and reach therapies on their own.

Some were using wheelchairs, some walker and someone, some were walking, and each patient was shadowing for 12 hours, shadowing, sorry, for 12 hours.

And, this meant that, I spent quite a lot of time living in recommendation clinics, actually, for two weeks in each clinic.

Because, most of them were far away from the city where I live.

So they were not in the same city.

And I would have to just travel there and, and be with patients for two weeks, which was, a great learning experience for me.

I have to say, sometimes traumatizing, sometimes very difficult emotional.

But I learned a lot.

So as an architect, just the same for three and a half months in different rehabilitation facilities.

And what I did is, I hope this is interesting to you talk a little bit about the method just in general, what it did.

So what I did is, I recorded the facts on the floor plans.

I also recorded the position of the event duration and description.

Then sometimes I took some tiny sketches from from the room sheets.

And I also noted down any comments on patients that were interesting.

So in patient shadowing, you can communicate with the person because you only follow one person during their day and you record everything that happens to that person during that day.

Of course, you have a specific focus.

So I focused on the nurse environment and but shadowing also can be used for other kind of studies, for example organizational studies.

This is where it originated from who understand different roles in a company.

For example, what you can do later with the data is also interesting because you can then looking into individual patients rooms and what they were doing, what kind of challenges they faced.

But also you can, aggregate all of these rooms and look at the patterns of activities of all the patients.

If you have a, this is an interesting point of shadowing as a method.

And if you're interested in the method, you can always contact me or have a look at this, paper that is on the bottom of the slide.

Okay.

So let's go into some interesting results.

So these were the research settings, that I was looking into, and, and, what I will mention before I go into the results of the stroke study is, that mobility and activity, of course, are very important, for, for patients in any kind of facility, not only in rehabilitation, also in hospitals and in, in our study, looking at working for thousand patients, worldwide.

We found out that, the mobility of the patient deteriorates quite significantly during their hospital stays.

This is because, of course, they are usually staying in bed and they're not having so many activities.

But also what is quite interesting is that the argument is always, yes, but patients are, you know, they're not able to get out of bed.

So they cannot be mobile, they cannot be active.

But then you look at this graph and you see that actually majority of patients is completely immobile and they don't need any kind of help.

Or they're not bedridden.

They're not walking with a cane or a walker.

This is General Hospital population.

So then imagine that in a rehabilitation center, patients are even better than in the hospital.

And then, have a look at this graph.

Which is quite interesting because what I found is that, again, patients with stroke in the recommendation are spending most of their time in their room, as you can see on this graph.

So the first bar, the first orange band and I have to cut because otherwise it would just go through the roof.

That is how much time aggregated all the patients spent in the room.

And then you can see, two colors in this graph or three, the blue one is, for scheduled activities.

So this is all activities that patients have to go to, such as therapies, treatments, appointments, anything that was scheduled for them.

And orange is everything that they did in their free time.

And then you notice that in the free time, they are always in the room.

And most of the time they're lying in bed.

And then you can see this tiny bar under space.

And then when we talk about the building itself, there is a dining or living or room on the ward.

There is a bateria and lobby.

That's kind of it.

And, so very rarely they get out of their rooms in their free time.

And this is, of course, not beneficial for their recovery.

And it also goes against, clinical guidelines to avoid bedrest and from work activity as much as possible.

Okay.

So let's go into challenges.

What were the problems and why were they maybe always inside of their room?

So of course there are many factors here.

I can talk about the built environment and what would be the challenges here.

But of course you always have the general fatigue.

Are there some therapies, different kinds of and maybe impairments or just, their general health condition, because of the disease that brought them into the hospital, the condition that brought them into the hospital.

So there are many factors here, but there are also some factors related to the built environment that significantly affect how much, activity they actually do.

And, about they are.

So what I found in patients shadowing, the that the most common challenge in the built environment, was reported also by patients and stop with wayfinding and wayfinding, of course could be a challenge because of complex layouts of these centers and also these therapy rooms that can be found all around the building and are very difficult for patients to find.

But what was interesting for me here is that, rehab centers adopted partly different strategies for wayfinding, which you can see on the right side.

They tried color coding.

They tried the minimalistic design.

As you can see on the bottom.

And despite all these different approaches, wayfinding was still a problem in all centers.

But they were less frequent in buildings with simpler layouts.

These kind of radio layouts where you have, one main vertical core and then you have wings coming from it.

And this was from my research.

What was the easiest for patients to find their way?

But patients cognitive impairments are also, certainly a contributing factor, as all shadow patients were already staying in the center for some time.

They were not there for the first time.

And then you might say, okay, they don't know the environment so they are not able to find their way.

But they were there for some time and they were still not finding, there has to be some ground or good factor on their community.

As well.

And I wanted to show here an example of the numerous of the included recommendation standards, but this one was built by thinking maybe 2000, 13 or 15.

I'm not completely sure.

And they selected this very minimalistic approach where it looks it looks quite static in the environment, but it was not very helpful for patients, because the building also had quite symmetrical layout.

As you can see on the right.

And patients would say that borders are all the same, they often didn't know where they had to go and signage was not even noticed most of the time.

And it was also interesting to see where patients were getting lost.

And this is the same center with minimalistic signage from last slide.

And patients in general had a lot of issues with symmetrical layouts, where there were many decision not and they had to choose where to go to then go left or right.

And they were usually getting lost on routes, from their wards to therapy that had four or more, decision nodes.

So four or more, joints, the corridors where they had to choose the direction.

And also this pattern will one, level change.

So that was kind of an average off around where patients get lost.

Another big challenge in these centers was patients.

Some patients even had to cover around two kilometers on average per day, in their irradiation centers.

And this is mainly for scheduled activities.

And, if you imagine now having a patient who is, for example, 18 years old, because stroke is mostly found in older population.

So these patient is eight years old and sitting in a wheelchair, paralyzed on one side, and has to cover two kilometers for a day.

This is quite the big challenge for patients.

And a lot of things happens on the way.

And it's dangerous because I have seen falls and I have seen accidents and things happen.

And just because of this fatigue of always having to travel so much.

And I also found that the greater distances between various spaces that patients had to reach were related to a higher number of encountered mobility barriers and greater dependance of points that.

So the longer are, the farther they had to reach.

They were asking for help more, and there were no significant differences between patients with different mobility level.

But this was happening for all the patient.

Another interesting finding was that patients in the free time, chose to go to places that are less far away from their room, which you can see in this graph here.

So you can see a median schedule distance.

These are all the routes or median distance of the roads that patients have to take to reach those scheduled appointments.

And then on the right you can see many median non schedule distance.

So this means that it's the median distance to places that they where they chose to go.

There is quite a big difference in distance as you can get.

So patients were choosing to go to places that were close to them.

Another activity and mobility challenge for patients were the mentions of corridors, especially their width.

And here I would like to show a case of one center which had, all the therapies concentrated on one floor and around one quarter.

This was a therapy part of them.

And this is where around 200 patients were covered multiple times per day for their therapies.

Just imagine that around 200 patients are coming to this one corridor all the time during the therapy hours.

And this was yeah, very tricky corridor.

What I find interesting is that the corridor was built according to the T-Norm or barrier free building, and for two wheelchair users to pass each other.

And the corridor was even wider than that.

It was 2.2m.

But then when the chairs were added to the corner, and then the patients came and then they were waiting, and then they would sit there, and remember, what is the, you know, not the wheelchair, but the walkers and the walkers in front of them.

Suddenly this corridor was not wide enough for two people using mobility aides to pass each other.

And this led to huge traffic problems in the corridor.

And another issue that was observed in just a few cases was that patients in a wheelchair did not have enough space to, to park their wheelchair, and there were always parking in front of the door blocking therapy doors.

So this is another obstacle that I found in the book environment.

And it is also interesting to look at the challenges that individual patients encountered from the observation day.

This is what shadowing gives you.

And this kind of valuable method is that you can go over in-depth into individual cases.

And because sometimes we forget and we get lost in the statistics and averages and medians and volunteers and experience of the individual patient.

And I show here an example of one older patient in a wheelchair, just to illustrate one individual experience.

And these patients encountered many issues with distance with therapy rooms during the day, the therapy rooms are shown in yellow and other marks in red.

And you can see on the left side, they show, the, the challenges that this person encountered.

So you can see here that she had to stop and rest or use the handrail to pull herself.

Every time she went through this corridor.

And this was very much distracting.

And the traffic and as this is the only therapy for the for the whole building, and if you remember from previous slide, there was no space for two patients using mobility aid for each other.

So every time this patient was in the corridor trying to reach therapy or trying to reach her room, there was kind of a traffic jam the quarter.

And then all of the patients were late for their therapies, and everything was disrupted.

She also spent a lot of time in her room and the rest of free time, in the corridor.

And she was mostly completely alone.

And this is shown in brown on the graph on the right side.

And she said that she was only spending time in the corridor because she didn't like the patients who were sharing the rubric.

This was quite an interesting finding for me, because differences in personalities and preferences of patients that they're staying in rehab centers, are another big challenge, in the design of these facilities.

And but they're also very important to take into account, to improve patients mobility in the, in the.

And even though overall in all centers activity levels very low in the time I still looked in more detail.

We where patients go in the free time and what they do and also we whom and most patients were all lower during their free time is you can see as blue circles and designated areas for socializing, such as a meeting room on the ward or a group area were used, but rarely, and patients were still allowed in most of the activities.

And what is interesting is that corridor became the most dominant space, where different activities took place, from sitting and talking to self-initiated therapy.

And this shows that partners in spaces might still hold a lot of potential to motivate patients activity outside of government.

And, it is interesting also to see the activities of patients in these specific recommendations.

And for, you might remember it from the wayfinding problem, because this was the center with the largest prevalence of free time activity.

And this was happening this week in functional dining slash living rooms on the wards.

And these centers were to meet compared to the others, because there is no large share of the area, which is difficult for a rehab center.

But there are these very small, multi-functional dining and living rooms that are all around the world, and they're close to patients and their visitor, when they get out of their room and from the corridor and they very quickly become familiar with the patients that are also eating in this room, because they're actually assigned where they have to go to have their meal.

And this is a very small group that is then being for, kind of a small community, which I notice.

And they then meet also outside of, the dining times and, they do different activities together or just talk and coffee.

So and this was.

Yeah.

And the thing that I noticed that actually motivated the activity of patients, and this might be the fact that their activity levels that are much higher here than other facilities and, other spaces that patients used in their free time and other centers were mainly car doors and seating areas.

And the part of this and, I would say that the important design opportunity for motivating more patient activity are communal rooms and spaces that are easy to reach, that are most efficient rooms, plus the communal areas and informal spaces in the corridors, and are offering possibilities for some kind of dignity.

So it can be a coffee corner, can be a nice view for.

To see where other opportunities lie, for architecture design and for promoting activity in patients.

I asked patients what kind of space room place would you like to have in the center?

And this is just an overview of mentioned spaces.

So here I didn't include a complete quote, but just the space dimension.

And it is quite interesting, you know, that the first two answers were comfortable sitting room and a couple of you will because these spaces exist in every rehabilitation center, but then they don't really satisfy the needs of patients.

And this was obvious from there.

A larger and somebody would say, okay, I would like, more sitting room or living room that that's that is not really clinical style or that is close to my room, or I would like a cafeteria that doesn't close at 5 p.m. because I don't know what to do with my visitors.

I think on the third day there, so there are these spaces where there.

But they were not really fulfilled the needs of the patient.

And there are also quite some interesting answers that you can see here, such as music room, cinema room, board games room.

One patient even mentioned something like an indoor, Central Park.

So they had quite interesting thoughts about what kind of spaces could be, in relation centers.

And most of them were some kind of communal areas.

And right now they're the communal areas in the radiation facilities are quite limited in terms of just the dining room or a generic living room.

One board.

And from here I started thinking or conceptualizing, architecture responds to these different rehabilitation phases and different interpretation goals and what patients need in different stages.

Because what the patient needs in the phase be, if you remember, these are patients were maybe confined to bed or barely getting out, or some of them are already starting to use a wheelchair and getting, mobilized for them.

The needs are very different than for someone who already almost, out of the clinic and able to walk and participate in normal life.

Because, yes, their abilities are different and the challenges in the built environment correspond to that.

So I tried to just conceptualize here what would be the best environment response remote activity for patients, in different stages.

So in the first one, of course, because we are just trying to stabilize the patient, we need the functional space.

And here and there should be just a quick and easy access of nursing staff to the patient rooms, and an opportunity for consistent monitoring.

And these are the functions that this space should offer.

But then when you look in the other three phases where patients are already getting more independent, in the first one it's about mobilization and activation.

And here patients would need, very free space, where they can easily reach, therapies on their own.

So therapy should be quite close to their rooms and there should be they should be as independent as possible and also, able to be monitored by nursing staff, needed.

But then as we are navigating these activities of daily living standards, the space should become more and more, motivating for patients to get out of their rooms and do other things and not just spend time in their rooms.

So for regaining, ideal independence that I suggest in the motivating space, with the primary goal to provide a space is easy to navigate, of course, but also offers a variety of common spaces for socializing with patients and visitors.

And also provides opportunity for training of their mobility.

While for the last stage, this is kind of bold, but I propose some kind of a community like space where actually there is no nurse's station on the board at all, and there is a kind of communal kitchen where they can also practice their activities of daily living with their partner.

There you can see just very, very conceptual visualizations of this work.

They still very much look like Warrens.

There's still much more potential there towards floor, but this is just a very simplified illustration.

And now I will I'll finish with, that part of the research here.

And I would like to just mention but these the current project that I'm working on, which is focusing also on modern environment, but more on visual impairment, or cognitive impairment or visual spatial processing.

And, this is a project mobility care which is looking into stroke is a rare disease, stroke in childhood.

I'm sure that, a lot of you and I know that stroke can happen in childhood.

It is quite a devastating thing.

And we decided to answer a European call on brain diseases and explore this topic together.

This is a project of three countries, Austria and Germany and Belgium.

And we also have a medical university so far.

And what we're trying to do, it's a very exploratory study.

Because there was no research on this topic so far.

This is the first study looking into this topic.

And because it's a rare disease, it's very, very exploratory.

We're trying to understand, and observe how these children experience the environment around them.

And what we do is we do visits with family homes in three countries.

We do interviews with children and their families in their home.

But, also in, in a building that is important to them in their daily life.

We also played a game with them that explores their experience with the built environment, and we mapped their abilities and abilities, in the built environment.

And then finally, we also use a kids screen questionnaire, which looks into their well-being.

And also, it looks into the various categories such as, psychological, mental and social well-being of children.

On the right side, you can also see whether our partners for medical diversity do, they do quite some interesting tests.

Understand, what is the visual perception and, how they kind of construct what they see is good in their brain, and they use an eye tracking mental location as the spatial resolution.

That and so.

And, I think that this is interesting to show, which we are still trying to understand how it relates to the built environment, but I wanted to just show it here.

Is that, children who had a stroke in the left hemisphere, have much worse, visual tracking, abilities.

And these are spatial processing.

So the first three children are four, that you can see on the left side, they had, left strokes or stroke in the left hemisphere.

And they're not able to, process globally what is happened.

So they are not able to replicate the figure.

So this is the figure that you can see on the bottom right.

The text consists of looking at the figure, trying to redraw it, and they're trying to later because.

And this is what happens.

So these are the results that that poor children had the left counties for stroke.

And they are not able to really remember what was the global picture just because while children that had the right stroke, they perform a bit better.

And they actually have this overview of what is the whole figure or maybe don't remember all the details, but and that was it for that study.

I will not show too much because we don't have a lot of that.

And I just want to show you so very quick slides of the current research that I'm also developing with my colleague where we are testing, methodology.

And this one is, not related to stroke, but there is an ambition, of course, to later apply to stroke patients.

You have to understand that, stroke patients have quite a lot of challenges and impairments that are variables that have to be done, in academic research and accounted for.

And for now, we are looking at healthy individuals which are actually is not in a psychiatric facility.

And we are, trying to understand how the built environment, the families, their heart rates, rest and well-being steps taken, communication and environment.

And these are the methods we are using.

This could be interesting to you.

Maybe not, but I wanted to share, some.

We include nurses and physicians in a psychiatric ward, and they completed surveys.

They completed the interview.

They are being observed during, two weeks.

So all of their shifts, they also we are, wearable sensors track and a smartwatch to measure their heart rate that the stress levels that from.

And then for the living conditions they use we use a light dosimeter that they also wear.

And then we have, of course, just a measurement tool to measure them, the area of the spaces.

And we of course do behavioral mapping of these conservations.

So we use floorplan to map where they are and where do this happen.

And here we are.

They have some interesting findings because we found that, the interviews and the stress data were kind of matching in a way.

So we found that the medication room was a space where a lot of stress happens for a lot of the staff, and this was confirmed also, it sounds like that they were wearing, but also me, their, perception and that they were talking about in the interviews.

So I will stop here because I think that, we don't have a lot more time.

And, here you can see, my contact information if you're ever interested in asking any questions, doing research together or anything like that.

And I'm sorry if I seem to be sleepy, but it's kind of, at 8 p.m. here on a Friday, so I really tried my best.

So thank you for your attention, and I would be happy to answer your question.

But, anywhere I don't you can't use.

How about now?

Yes.

Okay.

Okay.

So so thank you so much.

That was a wonderful presentation.

Great coverage on your previous research.

And it was really, really exciting to have more than one search.

It's, you know, versus just finding solutions and basically and how we should address issues of back and forth and finding that optimizing for solutions.

So I see if the students have any questions for you.

Ask.

So I had a question about, the kids that suffered a stroke in the left hemisphere of the brain when they struggled to recite the the diagram.

So could we, correlate that to maybe they have issues with wayfinding?

So let's say they go into a therapy room and then they are, you know, obviously they would be accompanied with an adult, but they leave the therapy room and then they become disoriented.

So should we increase proactive measures?

Finding is the.

Yeah.

So that is a great question.

Thank you.

Since something that we discussed a lot with their colleagues from Medical University, we had an idea first to accompany them when they arrive to the hospital.

But as you say, they're always with the model.

And it is very tricky mentally.

And to get this data now, what colleagues from Medical University say that is difficult for patients like this to read segment.

They need some kind of bigger landmarks, to be able to find their way because they're not really able to get these small details.

I cannot answer this question right now.

Completely accurately.

And because it is not possible for me to tell you the right answer, but this is something that we found out from the conversations with the medical university, and we are still trying to understand what this means for space.

So through the interviewers, through observing how they go through space, we are trying to still understand how they navigate and how they use the environment and how they talk about the children themselves.

Because we do interviews with children, what we don't have find the results yet.

So hopefully we will have something on this topic and it will be published at some point, because the project is ending next year and the end of next year.

So I hope there's something for this, because it's my goal to try to find out if these some indication of what this could mean for, for patients in the long run family.

And I know there is a lot of research with colors and, you know, different colors, you know, in a learning environment, you know, those, influence the learning efficiency of the kids, too.

So I'm wondering if colors play a part in that as well.

That could be.

Yeah, that's that's a great point.

I'm not sure yet, but that could be something.

Thank you, thank you, thank you.

Thank you so much.

The healthy vegetables that you test, CDC for now.

So in other questions.

I have one question.

So, well, what do you think about integrating technology or even a lot of tools in the environment to mitigate some of the issues that might change, but in those environment, in these, publication formats, where do you think we are with that information and how can we optimize?

And, well, that's a great question.

I think that technology itself brings, a lot of challenges as well.

What you have in predation is a lot of different tools for therapy.

You have even virtual reality, you have exoskeletons, you have all these different things that you can use and, for treatment of patients.

But spaces are not for you.

Get that.

That's where this.

So now we have again these.

Okay.

Everything's faster than architecture.

So there's technology coming now and I'm just not following.

So I think that we're not there yet with understanding what all these technological advances mean for design.

This is my partner right now.

And how we can accommodate them because they're developing so much faster than, you know, we're still kind of in the area.

There are no communal rooms and where are already having so many technological advances.

There was even in therapy and databases.

So yeah, this is quite tricky.

Think.

I'm sorry.

Today this is a very no answer today.

I don't have anything.

Great.

Thank you so much.

That was a great presentation.

Again thank you so much for joining us.

I know just have a baby.

So again we're really, really appreciating is that you actually were able to do this today and, just check in for the last time.

Any other questions because different points now.

All right.

Well, thanks again so much for inviting me.

And I'm kind of looking forward to any further questions if you have them or have a look at my papers.

Are there ever interested in any kind of, you know, research with me for students?

And please reach out to me.

I'm really happy to help, I'm sure.