DASH
Designing Accessible Solutions for Health
Pilot Design Sprint 2024
In August 2024, Jenna Altaii and I co-led a 3-day design sprint for rising senior Biomedical Engineering students focused on health equity and patient-centered design.
From L-R: Jenna Altaii, Justin Raines, Sofia Issel, Ryan Smith, Sarah Puwill, Leah Thomas
Background.
_edited.png)
1 / Health Disparities
Biomedical technologies often overlook the needs of marginalized populations, worsening health disparities [1-6].
2 / Lack of Health Equity Integration in BME
While health equity is gaining attention, it is rarely integrated early in biomedical engineering curricula [7].
3 / Stakeholder Engagement
Early stakeholder engagement in capstone projects is crucial, however, it can be difficult to facilitate off-campus stakeholder interactions.
Program Objectives.
1
Pilot a pre-capstone design sprint to immerse students in stakeholder engagement and equity-centered design.
2
Foster student understanding of the social determinants of health (SDOH) and their impact on medical technology development.
3
Address curricular gaps in biomedical engineering education by introducing health equity principles earlier in the design process.
Design Challenge
Improved orthotic for a local client with foot drop in Southwest Virginia
Our client is Mr. X, a local patient with foot drop based in Salem, Virginia. Frustrated with the inadequacy of devices currently on-the-market for footdrop, Mr. X and his wife approached the Virginia Tech Biomedical Engineering and Mechanics Department seeking an improved device to support Mr. X in his daily activities.
Students chosen for this design sprint continued to iterate on their design throughout the Fall and Spring semesters as part of their capstone project.
Methodology.
DAY 1
-
Foundations of health equity and user-centered design
-
Interviews with a physical therapist (PT) and a local client
-
Deepening understanding of user needs
-
Design brainstorming and feedback from second PT
DAY 2
DAY 3
-
Final design prep and structured plan for capstone
-
Presentation and co-design session with local client
Research Question
How do student's perceptions of health equity change over the course of the health equity design sprint?
After interviewing their client, the students created a list of user needs based on Mr. X's requests and their observations of his home environment.
Rather than having a traditional final presentation, the students led a co-design session with their client. They collaboratively ranked the identified user needs, allowing member checking and actively involving the client in the design process.
Co-Design.
Results.
_edited.png)
-
We found that the mental models of health equity grew in complexity from the start of the sprint to the end.
-
The students adopted more active language in their post-sprint maps, using phrases such as "Engaging with target audience" and "Effective communication from staff," indicating growing awareness of their participatory role.
-
Post-sprint maps also demonstrated a deeper integration of health equity and design thinking principles with new terms like "Patient-centered design" and "Thorough needs identification."
_edited.png)
-
Initially, there were 59 total terms (terms defined as a single “bubble” ), which increased by 150% to 89 terms post-sprint, with new terms like "Social Determinants of Health" and "factors out of [BME] control" which were topics covered in the lectures and activities.
-
The Community-Based Design category increased from 0 to 19 terms, indicating successful retention of the interconnections highlighted during the sprint.
Discussion.
The students and facilitators enjoying afternoon snacks and lemonade with Mr. and Mrs. X in their beautiful backyard.
1.
Students showed strong engagement with their local client, applying codesign, community-engagement, and interviewing skills in real time and collaboratively ranking user needs in place of a final presentation.
2.
Concept maps reflected deeper connections between design thinking and health equity, supported by hands-on client work and classroom emphasis.
3.
Trust and rapport grew quickly through structured and informal relationship-building activities, strengthening team dynamics with the client.
4.
Future iterations will expand assessment through longitudinal tracking, CATME team evaluations, and validated quantitative measures to better understand impacts on design competencies.
When the students initially asked their client what he needed, he said...
"I want to walk without thinking about it."
When the client tried on the final prototype at the end of capstone, he said...
"I don't have to think about it."
Read all about it!
We presented our work in progress (WIP) paper at the 2025 ASEE Conference in Montreal and were recognized as one of the top 6 WIP papers in the Biomedical Engineering Division
Work in Progress: Exploring the Impact of a Pre-Capstone Health Equity Design Sprint on Students’ Conceptions of Health Equity
Leah Thomas
Co-Leader
Jenna Altaii
Co-Leader
Dr. Chris Arena
Faculty Mentor
Dr. Ashley Taylor
Faculty Mentor
References:
[1] A. Baciu, Y. Negussie, A. Geller, and J. N. Weinstein, “The state of health disparities in theUnited States,” Communities in Action - NCBI Bookshelf, Jan. 11, 2017.https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK425844/
[2] M. W. Sjoding, R. P. Dickson, T. J. Iwashyna, S. E. Gay, and T. S. Valley, “Racial bias inpulse oximetry measurement,” New England Journal of Medicine, vol. 383, no. 25, pp. 2477–2478, Dec. 2020, doi: 10.1056/nejmc2029240.
[3] C. M. Madla, F. K. H. Gavins, H. A. Merchant, M. Orlu, S. Murdan, and A. W. Basit, “Let’stalk about sex: Differences in drug therapy in males and females,” Advanced Drug DeliveryReviews, vol. 175, p. 113804, May 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.addr.2021.05.014.
[4] J. B. Rubin, B. Hameed, M. Gottfried, W. M. Lee, and M. Sarkar, “Acetaminophen-inducedacute liver failure is more common and more severe in women,” Clinical Gastroenterology andHepatology, vol. 16, no. 6, pp. 936–946, Dec. 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2017.11.042.
[5] D. Zuckerman, “Hip implant failure for men and women,” JAMA Internal Medicine, vol. 173,no. 6, p. 442, Feb. 2013, doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2013.19.
[6] O. L. Lanier, M. D. Green, G. A. Barabino, and E. Cosgriff-Hernandez, “Ten simple rules inbiomedical engineering to improve healthcare equity,” PLoS Computational Biology, vol. 18, no.10, p. e1010525, Oct. 2022, doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1010525.
[7] M. Whitehead, R. Ali, E. Carrol, C. Holmes, and F. Kee, “Equity in Medical Devices:Independent Review,” GOV.UK, Mar. 11, 2024.https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/equity-in-medical-devices-independent-review-final-report/equity-in-medical-devices-independent-review-quick-read
[8] M. Steen, N. de Koning, and A. Pikaart, “Exploring human centred approaches in marketresearch and product development: three case studies,” in Proceedings of the conference onDutch directions in HCI, in Dutch HCI ’04. New York, NY, USA: Association for ComputingMachinery, Jun. 2004, p. 20. doi: 10.1145/1005220.1005244.
[9] P. J. Walters, “Knowledge in the making: Prototyping and human-centred design practice.,”doctoral, Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield :, 2005. Accessed: Oct. 08, 2024. [Online].Available: https://shura.shu.ac.uk/20492/
[10] J. Kim and D. Wilemon, “Focusing the fuzzy front–end in new product development,” RDManag., vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 269–279, 2002, doi: 10.1111/1467-9310.00259.
[11] A. Jackson, E. Barrella, and C. Bodnar, “Application of concept maps as an assessment toolin engineering education: Systematic literature review,” Journal of Engineering Education, vol.113, no. 4, pp. 752–766, Jul. 2023, doi: 10.1002/jee.20548.[
12] M. Besterfield‐Sacre, J. Gerchak, M. R. Lyons, L. J. Shuman, and H. Wolfe, “ScoringConcept maps: an integrated rubric for assessing engineering education,” Journal of EngineeringEducation, vol. 93, no. 2, pp. 105–115, Apr. 2004, doi: 10.1002/j.2168-9830.2004.tb00795.x.
[13] Turns, J., C. Atman, and R. Adams. (2000). "Concept maps for engineering education: acognitively motivated tool supporting varied assessment functions." IEEE Transactions onEducation 43 (2).
[14] V. Braun, V. Clarke, “Thematic analysis,” 1st Ed. UK; SAGE Publications Inc, Dec. 11,2024. https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/thematic-analysis/book248481
[15] “Concept maps for engineering education: a cognitively motivated tool supporting variedassessment functions,” IEEE Journals & Magazine | IEEE Xplore.https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/848069
[16] O. L. Lanier, M. D. Green, G. A. Barabino, and E. Cosgriff-Hernandez, “Ten simple rules inbiomedical engineering to improve healthcare equity,” PLoS Computational Biology, vol. 18, no.10, p. e1010525, Oct. 2022, doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1010525.
[17] J. R. Grohs, G. R. Kirk, M. M. Soledad, and D. B. Knight, “Assessing systems thinking: Atool to measure complex reasoning through ill-structured problems,” Think. Ski. Creat., vol. 28,pp. 110–130, Jun. 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2018.03.003.
[18] A. R. Carberry, H. S. Lee, and M. W. Ohland, “Measuring engineering design self-efficacy,” J. Eng. Educ., vol. 99, no. 1, pp. 71–79, Jan. 2010, doi: 10.1002/j.2168-9830.2010.tb01043.x.