Document Type : Original Article


1 Student Research Committee, Department of Ergonomics, School of Health, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran

2 Student Research Committee Department of Occupational Health, School of Health, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran

3 Department of Ergonomics, School of Health, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran



Background: Universal Design (UD) means designing the products and environments everyone can use as far as possible without requiring specialized compatibility or design. The present study aimed to design and develop a comprehensive and valid checklist to evaluate the design of banks based on UD principles and implement it in Iranian banks.
Methods: Based on the seven UD principles and using a mixed methods sequential exploratory design, an initial checklist with 61 items was developed. Then, its psychometric properties were evaluated based on face and content validity and inter-rater agreement. The final checklist was prepared based on the results of this stage and used in the next stage to evaluate the design of 17 banks.
Results: The final checklist consisted of 10 areas (as per the seven UD principles). The Content Validity Ratio (CVR) and Content Validity Index (CVI) were calculated as 0.91 and 0.93, respectively. Based on areas of the checklist, all the evaluated banks showed many problems, the most significant of which were related to the areas of equal use by different groups, flexibility in use, and the size and space of access and use.
Conclusion: The present study’s findings led to the design of a comprehensive and standard checklist to evaluate the design of banks in terms of UD principles. The results indicated that the UD principles were not observed in most studied banks, and they need to implement targeted design interventions.


  1. Barbotte E, Guillemin F, Chau N. Prevalence of impairments, disabilities, handicaps and quality of life in the general population: a review of recent literature. Bulletin of the World Health Organization. 2001; 79:1047-55. doi: 10.1590/S0042-96862001001100008. PMID: 11731812; PMCID:
  2. Mont D. Measuring disability prevalence: Special Protection, World Bank; 2007.
  3. Organization WH. International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health: Children & Youth Version: ICF-CY: World Health Organization; 2007.
  4. Organization WH. World Bank (2011). World report on disability. 2017:96.
  5. SCo I. Iran Statistical Yearbook. Statistical Centre of Iran Tehran, Iran. 2012.
  6. Soltani S, Khosravi B, Salehiniya H. Prevalence of disability in Iran. Iranian journal of public health. 2015; 44(10):1436-7. PMID: 26576364; PMCID: PMC4644596. [in Persian]
  7. Hosseini FS. Effect of physical activity on physical and mental health in elderly men. Journal of Health and Care. 2011; 13(2):19-25. [in Persian]
  8. Nasiri m, Barasteh s, Rashedi v. Survey Universal Design Criteria of Veteran Hospices of Tehran in 2016. Journal of Gerontology. 2020;5(2):24-32. [in Persian]
  9. Gorji A, Shirzad Nazarloo Z. The status of the rights of persons with disabilities in the field of urban rights. Strategic Studies of public policy. 2018;8(26):137-63. [in Persian]
  10. Kawahara K, Narikawa M. The unique achievements of Japanese industries in the super-aged society. Applied Ergonomics. 2015; 46:258-66. doi: 10.1016/j.apergo.2013.03.007. PMID: 24581930.
  11. Wazzan W. My Accessible Room is not Accessible, Applying Human Factors: Principals to Enhance the Accessibility of Hotel Rooms. Procedia Manufacturing. 2015; 3:5405-10. doi: 10.1016/j.promfg.2015.07.660.
  12. Waller S, Bradley M, Hosking I, Clarkson PJ. Making the case for inclusive design. Applied ergonomics. 2015; 46:297-303. doi: 1016/j.apergo.2013.03.012. PMID: 23538129.
  13. Ostroff E. Universal Design: an evolving paradigm. Universal Design 2011; 2:34-42.
  14. Clarkson PJ, Coleman R. History of Inclusive Design in the UK. Applied ergonomics. 2015; 46:235-47. doi: 10.1016/j.apergo.2013.03.002. PMID: 23570838.
  15. Dianat I, Adeli P, Talebian AH. Ergonomic approaches and challenges in product design. Iranian Journal of Ergonomics. 2016;4(2):8-16. doi: 21859/joe-04021. [in Persian]
  16. Beecher V, Paquet V. Survey instrument for the Universal Design of consumer products. Applied Ergonomics. 2005;36(3):363-72. doi: 10.1016/j.apergo.2004.10.014. PMID: 15854580.
  17. Story MF. Principles of UD. UD handbook. 2001.
  18. Libanio C, Amaral F, Migowski S. Universal Design education: Brazilian student’s reflections and their environment2017.
  19. Polit DF, Beck CT, Owen SV. Is the CVI an acceptable indicator of content validity? Appraisal and recommendations. Research in nursing & health. 2007;30(4):459-67. doi: 10.1002/nur.20199. PMID: 17654487.
  20. Lawshe CH. A quantitative approach to content validity. Personnel psychology. 1975; 28(4):563-75. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-6570.1975.tb01393.x.
  21. Polit DF, Beck CT, Owen SV. Is the CVI an acceptable indicator of content validity? Appraisal and recommendations. Research in Nursing & Health. 2007;30(4):459-67. doi: 10.1002/nur.20199. PMID: 17654487.
  22. Mokarami H, Jahangiri M, Javid AB, Ebrahimi MH, Zaroug Hossaini R, Barkhordari A, et al. Developing and Validating Tool for Assessing the Field Internship Course in the Field of Occupational Health Engineering. Iran occupational health journal. 2019;16(3):58-70. [in Persian]
  23. Salonen H, Lahtinen M, Lappalainen S, Nevala N, Knibbs LD, Morawska L, et al. Design approaches for promoting beneficial indoor environments in healthcare facilities: A review. Intelligent Buildings International. 2013;5(1):26-50. doi: 10.1080/17508975.2013.764839.
  24. Malone EB, Dellinger BA. Furniture design features and healthcare outcomes. Concord, CA: The Center for Health Design. 2011.
  25. Singh G. To study the effect of office Furniture on employees productivity. Paripex-Indian Journal of Research. 2018;7(6).
  26. Hartblay C. Good ramps, bad ramps: Centralized design standards and disability access in urban Russian infrastructure. American Ethnologist. 2017; 44(1):9-22. doi: 10.1111/amet.12422.