Search results

According to the literature concerned with this study, less than satisfactory outcomes have been achieved through implementing business process improvements methods (BPIMs) in industries, in general, and in healthcare, in particular. The existing methods used need to be enhanced in order to create more effective outcomes. There has also been a lack of studies documenting gaps or shortfalls in implementing BPIMs, to be presented to the BPI research community. Therefore, researchers of this paper have attempted to fill gaps between theory and practice. On the contrary, there is also a need to link practical outcomes in the healthcare domain with those of the BPI research community. The purpose of this paper is to review popular BPIMs, techniques and tools applied in the healthcare domain; it seeks to examine and highlight their significant roles, clarify their pros and cons, and find opportunities to enhance their impact on the achievement of more sustainable improvements in the healthcare domain.

This study has been carried out by using a methodology combining an in-depth literature review with a comparison framework, which is called as the “Framework for Comparing Business Process Improvement Methods.” The framework is composed of seven dimensions and has been adapted from four recognized, related frameworks. In addition to the in-depth review of related literature and the adapted comparison framework, researchers have conducted several interviews with healthcare BPI practitioners in different hospitals, to attain their opinions of BPI methods and tools used in their practices.

The main results have indicated that significant improvements have been achieved by implementing BPIMs in the healthcare domain according to related literature. However, there were some shortfalls in the existing methods that need to be resolved. The most important of these has been the shortfall in representing and analyzing targeted domain knowledge during improvement phases. The tool currently used for representing the domain, specifically flowcharts, is very abstract and does not present the domain in a clear form. The flowchart tool also fails to clearly present the separation of concerns between business processes and the information systems processes that support a business in a given domain.

The findings of this study can be useful for BPI practitioners and researchers, mainly within the healthcare domain. The findings can help these groups to understand BPIMs shortfalls and encourage them to consider how BPIMs can be potentially improved.

This researchers of this paper have proposed a comparison framework for highlighting popular BPIMs in the healthcare domain, along with their uses and shortfalls. In addition, they have conducted a deep literature review based on the practical results obtained from different healthcare institutions implementing unique BPIMs around the world. There has also been valuable interview feedback attained from BPI leaders of specific hospitals in Saudi Arabia. This combination is expected to contribute to knowledge of BPIMs from both theoretical and practical points of view.

The purpose of this paper is to understand the degree to which a quality and safety culture exists after healthcare workers in an academic medical center complete a quality improvement and patient safety education program focused on developing leaders to change the future of healthcare quality and safety.

The safety attitudes questionnaire (SAQ) short-form was used for measuring the culture of quality and safety among healthcare workers who were graduates of an academic medical center’s healthcare quality and safety program. A 53 percent response rate from program alumni resulted in 54 usable responses.

This study found that 42 (78 percent) of the respondents report that they are currently working in a healthcare quality and safety culture, with 25 (59 percent) reporting promotion into a leadership role after completion of the quality improvement education program. This compares favorably to AHRQ culture of safety survey results obtained by the same academic medical center within the year prior revealing only 63 percent of all inpatient employees surveyed reported working in a quality and safety culture.

The study design precluded knowing to what degree a quality and safety culture, as measured by the SAQ, existed prior to attending the healthcare quality and safety program.

This study has practical value for other organizations considering a quality and safety education program. For organizations seeking to build capacity in quality and safety, training future leaders through a robust curriculum is essential. This may be achieved through development of an internal training program or through attending an outside organization for education.

The purpose of this paper is to develop an integrated patient-focused analytical framework to improve quality of care in accident and emergency (A & E) unit of a Maltese hospital.

The study adopts a case study approach. First, a thorough literature review has been undertaken to study the various methods of healthcare quality management. Second, a healthcare quality management framework is developed using combined quality function deployment (QFD) and logical framework approach (LFA). Third, the proposed framework is applied to a Maltese hospital to demonstrate its effectiveness. The proposed framework has six steps, commencing with identifying patients’ requirements and concluding with implementing improvement projects. All the steps have been undertaken with the involvement of the concerned stakeholders in the A & E unit of the hospital.

The major and related problems being faced by the hospital under study were overcrowding at A & E and shortage of beds, respectively. The combined framework ensures better A & E services and patient flow. QFD identifies and analyses the issues and challenges of A & E and LFA helps develop project plans for healthcare quality improvement. The important outcomes of implementing the proposed quality improvement programme are fewer hospital admissions, faster patient flow, expert triage and shorter waiting times at the A & E unit. Increased emergency consultant cover and faster first significant medical encounter were required to start addressing the problems effectively. Overall, the combined QFD and LFA method is effective to address quality of care in A & E unit.

The proposed framework can be easily integrated within any healthcare unit, as well as within entire healthcare systems, due to its flexible and user-friendly approach. It could be part of Six Sigma and other quality initiatives.

Although QFD has been extensively deployed in healthcare setup to improve quality of care, very little has been researched on combining QFD and LFA in order to identify issues, prioritise them, derive improvement measures and implement improvement projects. Additionally, there is no research on QFD application in A & E. This paper bridges these gaps. Moreover, very little has been written on the Maltese health care system. Therefore, this study contributes demonstration of quality of emergency care in Malta.

This study intends to improve the quality of venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis practices including proper VTE risk assessment and the appropriate prophylaxis measures for surgical urology patients.

The authors applied the Six-Sigma define, measure, analyze, improve and control (DMAIC) improvement methodology in a pre–post interventional study that involved all adult patients above 18 years old indicated and scheduled for urology surgical interventions including endoscopic urological surgeries in a urology specialized 60-bed hospital. The pre-intervention sample included all patients meeting the inclusion criteria over a period of six months. Post-intervention sample included all patients meeting the inclusion criteria over a period of six months. The improvement areas included both the VTE risk assessment as well as the VTE prophylaxis prescription.

DMAIC methodology has achieved a substantial sustained improvement in surgical urology VTE prophylaxis practices with an average of 70% on both levels; VTE risk assessment practices and VTE prophylaxis prescribing practices were statistically significant. The post-intervention results also showed a statistically controlled process with no special cause variations. Based on the study results, the Six-Sigma DMAIC methodology can be considered of high value when applied in healthcare clinical practice improvement projects.

The project study includes some pitfalls that can be addressed as follows: 1. The lack of VTE rate incidence tracking. This limitation can be partly refuted when the authors conduct a literature review and explore that the VTE prophylaxis effectiveness had been proven with sufficient evidence to an extent that pushed several scientific societies to develop their own guidelines to support VTE prophylaxis. (Algattas et al., 2018). 2. Another limitation of this study can be that it handled only surgical patients and more specifically surgical urology patients. Of course, VTE prophylaxis is a crucial life-threatening problem not only for the surgical admitted patients but also for all the medical admitted patients either in hospital wards or ICUs. However, the prediction that surgical patients especially surgical urology patients are more prone to VTE development risk as they have -in several cases-two or three main additive risk factors which are age, procedure duration and malignancy in elderly men. (Tikkinen et al., 2014). So, the authors consider the study project to be a prototype that hopefully can be utilized for future study projects that will manage both other surgical specialty patients and medical patients on the national level and can track accurately and effectively report the VTE incidence rates.

Several recommendations can be extracted from the research project that is summarized in the following points: Paying focused attention to continuous healthcare quality improvement initiatives and projects as a main approach for healthcare improvement especially for the public health-related problems. This might be achieved through periodic region-specific or specialty-specific focus groups from which public health problems could be addressed and prioritized to be considered as a part of country healthcare campaigns regarding cost-utility and feasibility studies. The adoption of a system thinking approach in dealing with the improvement strategies; all efforts and resources are to be employed to achieve a common objective. This includes the generation of a national-wide electronic health information system that can aid in healthcare resource allocation and direct the healthcare efforts towards the most important, high-priority public health problems. Electronic national-wide health record is really an effort, and resources consuming activity, but actually, it's worth exerting efforts, and its valuable outcomes may be seen several years later. 3. Development of unified national specialized VTE prophylaxis pathways to standardize the patient-specific VTE prophylaxis plans. Standardization of healthcare pathways enables healthcare professionals to follow an evidence-based practice which will be reflected on the improvement of healthcare quality level, cost-effectiveness enhancement, and timely patient care on all levels especially in high critical areas like ER and ICU. 4. Incorporation of VTE prophylaxis costs in the universal health insurance diagnosis-related group (DRG) insurance packages and service pricing. Universal health insurance is a nationwide strategy that is aiming to cover all Egypt residents by the year 2030. Universal health insurance is being following the DRG reimbursement policy that is thought to control all the healthcare-associated costs so, the VTE prophylaxis costs shall be added as the main cost item to encourage all healthcare facilities to follow an evidence-based VTE prophylaxis pathway taking into consideration the high-risk patient categories who will definitely represent a high-cost burden on the long run if they suffer a VTE event.

DMAIC improvement methodology applications in healthcare are still relatively limited, especially on the clinical level. The study can be considered one of a kind in Egypt dealing with a comprehensive DMAIC methodology application on the clinical level.

The purpose of this paper is to illuminate strengths and limitations in quality improvement work, when involving patients.

The experience-based co-design (EBCD) method was used when improving care for patients undergoing otosclerosis surgery. Individual interviews and focus groups were interpreted using qualitative content analysis.

Strengths mentioned by patients were that their participation made a difference. The first steps were found effective in giving an in-depth view of patients’ experiences and the staff got an increased understanding about specific patient needs. However, weaknesses were found in the latter phases, those of improving and follow-up, health care staff had difficulties to keep their focus on patients’ experiences and invite patients to be involved. Patients’ participation decreased, and there was a lack of tools to support the process.

The content in this paper is mainly based on one case. However, the findings are in congruence with earlier research and add further knowledge to the research area.

The findings can be used in healthcare when involving patients in improvement work.

There is no earlier study which involves patients with otosclerosis when using EBCD. Furthermore, this paper illuminates that there is a need to increase collaboration with patients. The latter phases often seem to be handled by health care professionals without involving patients; this paper suggest a development using dedicated quality tools.

Research on accreditation has mostly focused on assessing its impact using large scale quantitative studies, yet little is known on how quality is improved in practice through an accreditation process. Using a case study of an acute teaching hospital in Portugal, the purpose of this paper is to explore the dynamics through which accreditation can lead to an improvement in the quality of healthcare services provided.

Data for the case study was collected through 46 in-depth semi-structured interviews with 49 clinical and non-clinical members of staff. Data were analyzed using a framework thematic analysis.

Interviewees felt that hospital accreditation contributed to the improvement of healthcare quality in general, and more specifically to patient safety, as it fostered staff reflection, a higher standardization of practices, and a greater focus on quality improvement. However, findings also suggest that the positive impact of accreditation resulted from the approach the hospital adopted in its implementation as well as the fact that several of the procedures and practices required by accreditation were already in place at the hospital, albeit often in an informal way.

The study was conducted in only one hospital. The design of an accreditation implementation plan tailored to the hospital’s context can significantly contribute to positive outcomes in terms of quality and patient safety improvements.

This study provides a better understanding of how accreditation can contribute to healthcare quality improvement. It offers important lessons on the factors and processes that potentiate quality improvements through accreditation.

The purpose of this paper is to present a study of how quality improvement tools and techniques are framed within healthcare settings.

The paper employs an interpretive approach to understand how quality improvement tools and techniques are mobilised and legitimated. It does so using a case study of the NHS Modernisation Agency Improvement Leaders' Guides in England.

Improvement Leaders' Guides were framed within a service improvement approach encouraging the use of quality improvement tools and techniques within healthcare settings. Their use formed part of enacting tools and techniques across different contexts. Whilst this enactment was believed to support the mobilisation of tools and techniques, the experience also illustrated the challenges in distributing such approaches.

The paper provides an important contribution in furthering our understanding of framing the “social act” of quality improvement. Given the ongoing emphasis on quality improvement in health systems and the persistent challenges involved, it also provides important information for healthcare leaders globally in seeking to develop, implement or modify similar tools and distribute leadership within health and social care settings.

In 2002/3 the Health Foundation launched an ambitious five‐year Programme of investment in leadership development. This investment included resource for simultaneous evaluation (Lucas 2006). Against a background of unprecedented upheaval in healthcare systems in the UK, the Leadership Programme has evolved, encompassing initiatives aimed both at individuals and teams. The Programme has been refined to provide a more explicit focus on leadership for quality improvement. This article reviews what has been learnt from this investment to date, focusing on lessons both for practitioners and for academics.The focus of this paper is what has been learnt from running the Foundation's three individual leadership schemes over the past three years. The authors argue that to be effective talent spotting needs to develop rigorous mechanisms for identification of potential; that there needs to be a sustained focus on quality improvement outcomes if leadership programmes are to deliver more than personal development; that the most effective development is work rather than classroom‐based; and that organisational commitment for leadership development is critical if the full impact is to be realised. The authors draw on an extensive evidence base from the Programme evaluation, including some case studies.

This paper sets out to analyse the use of the Six Sigma methodology to improve quality in healthcare. It looks at how Six Sigma grew out of the concept of Total Quality Management (TQM).

Six Sigma is a quality improvement methodology that has been widely adopted by companies since the early 1990s and has grown exponentially in the healthcare industry during the past five years. Some of the main tenets of Six Sigma have emerged from the principles of TQM, including the notion that the entire organization must support the quality effort; that there should be a vigorous education effort; and that a quality improvement process should emphasize root cause analysis.

In spite of its early success, TQM “crashed and burned” for several reasons including the fact that financial benefits were difficult to assign to TQM efforts, root cause was not always determined resulting in recurring errors, there was no common metric to measure the level of quality attained, and quality efforts were sometimes aimed at processes or operations that were not critical to the customer. Six Sigma filled the vacuums created by these TQM failures in several ways. Under the Six Sigma methodology, quality improvement projects are carefully defined so that they can be successfully completed within a relatively short time frame. Financials are applied to each completed project so that management knows how much the project saves the institution.

On each project, intense study is used to determine root cause analysis; and in the end, a metric known as “sigma level” can be assigned to signify the level of quality. Six Sigma has a “critical to quality” dimension that keeps the quality effort focused on improving only those things that really matter to the customer.

The purpose of this paper is to find determinants of the effectiveness of the business improvement processes that create value for services offered to patients in healthcare industries. The words patients and customers are used interchangeably throughout without any distinction. The features that distinguish medical services of different types and their inter-related factors are examined. The aim is to come up with a model of value vs cost that can help healthcare managers examine and use this exercise as an example of improvement micro-projects to help reduce cost and eliminate the patient’s dissatisfaction gaps.

The list of factors or attributes influencing the creation of value of a given medical process or a single procedure is described. The factors in the value creation are examined that will help in the categories for the risk analysis to determine the value-added benefits for the patient outcome. The cost analysis is approached from two angles to include: the cost of the service, and the costs of poor quality of service.

The model describes the value for the patient satisfaction depending on the quality level or grade of the treatment or procedures used and the cost factor. The analysis is done at several levels with special reference to case examples. A search for various analogous models in similar service providing situation used in business process management of other process types is highlighted and discussed.

The model is an interesting generic illustration for considering value vs cost in all patient care strategies. It enables the position of various medical procedures that can be applied to the same disease in order to keep the variations as minimum as possible within the quality control specification limits. The importance in different aspects of check-points or hold points for inspection is also discussed.