Sussex Community NHS Foundation Trust Case Study

The Sussex Community NHS Foundation Trust offers wheelchair and specialist seating services with an accessible web widget that represents a potential real-world application for our technology [3].

NHS Wheelchair Service Web Widget

Sussex Community NHS Foundation Trust logo

The Sussex Community NHS Foundation Trust provides wheelchair and specialist seating services across Sussex, using a web-based widget to improve accessibility for users. This widget enables patients to access information about wheelchair services, schedule appointments, and track their equipment requests. The implementation showcases a practical application of accessible design principles in healthcare service delivery [3].

Key Features:

  • Screen reader compatibility for visually impaired users
  • Simplified navigation with clear information hierarchy
  • Mobile-responsive design for access across different devices
  • Integration with NHS appointment systems

Relevance to Our Project:

  • Public Service Integration: Demonstrates how accessibility features can be integrated into essential public health services
  • User-First Design: Prioritizes the needs of users with mobility challenges
  • Institutional Adoption: Shows how large organizations can implement accessibility tools within existing systems

Technology Review

In this section, we are evaluating different technologies that can be a good fit for the development of this project.

FrontEnd (Widget)

Three technological aspects were considered during the frontend development of the widget: the Map API, the frontend framework, and the speech service. The widget is designed to display geolocation points retrieved from the database while incorporating accessibility features to enhance usability for all users.

Map API

Google Maps API

  • Extensive accessibility features
  • Accurate geolocation and real-time data
  • Seamless integration with other Google services
  • Usage costs can be high for large-scale applications

Mapbox API

  • Highly customizable map styles and UI elements
  • Supports offline maps for better accessibility
  • Lightweight and optimized for performance
  • Requires more setup compared to Google Maps

OpenStreetMap (OSM) API

  • Free and open-source with no licensing fees
  • Community-driven, highly detailed map data
  • Supports various accessibility-focused overlays
  • Inconsistent data quality in some regions

Frontend Framework

Next.js

  • Optimized for SEO with server-side rendering
  • Built-in API routes and backend capabilities
  • Strong ecosystem & easy deployment with Vercel
  • Requires backend knowledge for API routes

Vue.js

  • Simple and beginner-friendly syntax
  • Reactive data binding for smooth UI updates
  • Lightweight and fast compared to larger frameworks
  • Smaller ecosystem than React, fewer third-party libraries

FrontEnd (Database Website)

We needed a front-end UI framework that can carry out simple functions such as viewing the database, downloading the database in JSON format, and adding data to the database. Three frontend frameworks were considered for the website.

Frontend Framework

Next.js

  • React framework for server-rendered applications
  • Static & dynamic rendering support
  • Optimized for SEO
  • Requires backend knowledge for API routes

Create React App (CRA)

  • Standard way to start a React project
  • No backend setup required
  • Good for small to medium projects
  • No built-in server-side rendering (SSR)

Vue.js

  • Simple and beginner-friendly
  • Reactive data binding
  • Lightweight and fast
  • Smaller ecosystem than React

Backend

We need a database capable of efficiently storing geolocation data, particularly for accessibility features such as wheelchair services and zebra crossings. Additionally, the framework for building APIs must support swift posting and retrieval of this data, allowing users to contribute new geolocation points and fetch relevant accessibility details in real time.

Database

PostgreSQL

  • Strong support for geospatial data with PostGIS
  • ACID-compliant for reliable transactions
  • Efficient indexing for fast location queries
  • Requires more configuration for scaling

MongoDB

  • Flexible schema for dynamic geolocation data
  • Horizontally scalable for large datasets
  • Native support for GeoJSON queries
  • Weaker transaction support compared to SQL databases

MySQL

  • Reliable relational database with indexing support
  • Good read performance for frequently accessed data
  • Scalable with replication options
  • Less geospatial support than PostgreSQL

Web Framework

FastAPI

  • Asynchronous support for fast API responses
  • Built-in data validation with Pydantic
  • Auto-generates OpenAPI documentation
  • Smaller ecosystem compared to Django

Django

  • Robust framework with built-in ORM
  • Large ecosystem with reusable apps
  • Secure and scalable for production APIs
  • Slower for high-concurrency API workloads compared to FastAPI

Summary of Technical Decisions

The below section provides an overview of the final decisions on technologies used for each product.

Widget

Google Maps API was selected for its seamless integration[4] and reliable data quality[5]. Given our reliance on navigation services, its widespread familiarity among users makes it the ideal choice.

Next.js was selected for its scalability and performance benefits compared to Vue.js. Next.js is optimised for fast loading times and it works well for large projects with API-driven content like accessibility databases.

Azure Speech Services was chosen for its superior speech recognition capabilities. Its accuracy in noisy environments compared to Google Cloud Speech-to-Text was another key factor that was considered.[6]

Database Website

Create React App (CRA) was chosen for its simplicity and ease of use.[7] Due to the simple website structure, SEO and server-side rendering (SSR) were not primary concerns. In addition, CRA keeps the project lightweight, reducing unnecessary overhead for a database-driven website.

Backend

PostgreSQL was chosen for the database as it ensures strong data consistency, which is crucial for storing accessibility features. PostgreSQL also has better query optimisation features,[8] ensuring efficient retrieval of geolocation data, especially working with large datasets.

FastAPI was chosen due to asynchronous capabilities, making it significantly faster than Django for handling API requests, which is critical for a geolocation-based system that requires swift data retrieval and posting. FastAPI's support for Python type hints and built-in data validation[9] ensures robust and secure API endpoints, reducing potential errors when handling location-based data submissions.

References

Citing all sources used in research and technology selection.

  1. "Japan Walk Guide: Navigation Tool for Mobility Challenges," NTT Technical Review. [Online]. Available: https://www.ntt-review.jp/archive/ntttechnical.php?contents=ntr202202fa8.html
  2. "Frequently Asked Questions about Wheelmap," Wheelmap FAQ . [Online]. Available: https://news.wheelmap.org/en/faq/
  3. "Wheelchair and Specialist Seating Service," Sussex Community NHS Foundation Trust. [Online]. Available: https://www.sussexcommunity.nhs.uk/patients-and-visitors/services/wheelchair-and-specialist-seating-service
  4. "Google Maps API vs MapBox API," aloa Blog. [Online]. Available: https://aloa.co/blog/mapbox-vs-google-maps-what-you-need-to-know-before-you-choose#:~:text=Given%20our%20analysis%2C%20this%20guide%20compares%20Mapbox%20vs,ensuring%20the%20best%20fit%20for%20your%20mobile%20app.
  5. "Goggle Maps API vs Open Street Maps API," GeoDirectory. [Online]. Available: https://docs.wpgeodirectory.com/article/233-differences-between-the-google-maps-and-openstreetmap-apis
  6. "Microsoft vs Google speech-to-text," techradarpro. [Online]. Available: https://www.techradar.com/news/speech-apps-microsoft-vs-Google
  7. "CRA vs next.js," byteScrum. [Online]. Available: https://blog.bytescrum.com/nextjs-vs-create-react-app-which-one-should-you-choose
  8. "PostgreSQL vs MongoDB," Sling Academy. [Online]. Available: https://www.slingacademy.com/article/postgresql-vs-mongodb-which-is-for-scale-and-speed/
  9. "FastAPI vs Django," Better Stack. [Online]. Available: https://betterstack.com/community/guides/scaling-python/django-vs-fastapi/