Improved intensive care lighting and staff wellbeing: A pilot feasibility service evaluation.

Abstract

Background: The lighting environment in intensive care units (ICUs) is markedly different from natural light, potentially disrupting patients' circadian rhythms and impacting staff wellbeing. New lighting technologies may mitigate these effects.

Methods: A mixed methods service evaluation was conducted in a London ICU using Dyson Lightcycle™ luminaires (DLs) to evaluate staff wellbeing. Wellbeing assessments and user perceptions of the built environment were conducted using validated questionnaires before, during, and after DL deployment. Existing ambient light usage was measured using HOBO devices installed on the ceiling. Additionally, data on DL usage (including spectral data) were collected continuously using Raspberry Pi™ sensors.

Results: DL usage was high (>70% per 24 h), primarily as supplementary lighting. Users found DLs easy to control and beneficial for clinical and administrative tasks. Participants assigned a 12.5% higher satisfaction score rated from 0 to 8 of lighting overall during deployment compared to pre-deployment (6.06 ± 0.29 and 5.06 ± 0.60, respectively; p = 0.20). Control variables for the built environment (noise, temperature and air quality) remained unchanged. Staff reported improvements in mood (38%, p < 0.001), fatigue (17.7%, p < 0.001), and sleep quality (21.2%, p = 0.01) during DL use.

Discussion: In the first pilot feasibility service evaluation of its kind, the relationship between ICU lighting quality and staff wellbeing was investigated using DLs. We show that it is feasible to equip an ICU with a novel mode of lighting to evaluate both illuminance and user-centred outcomes. The study suggests a positive association between DL use and staff wellbeing, with notable improvements in mood, fatigue and sleep quality. The nature of the emitted light may enhance the space rather than simply illuminate, thus further adding to a feeling of wellbeing. These findings support data from studies which report effects of light brightness and colour on mood. Additionally, there appears to be a signal towards benefit to the user when additional lighting is provided, compared to the current overhead fluorescent luminaires prevalent in most ICUs. In this service evaluation these benefits were demonstrated in ICU staff operating the device. However, it is conceivable that effects such as improved mood and reduced sleep disturbance may have patient benefits too.

Conclusion: Local lighting systems like DLs show promise in enhancing ICU staff wellbeing. Their impact on patient outcomes and the potential for broader implementation deserve further investigation in appropriately designed and powered larger-scale trials.