PURPOSE: Patients with bone and brain metastases are among the most symptomatic nonemergency patients treated by radiation oncologists. Treatment should begin as soon as possible after the request is generated. We tested the hypothesis that the operational improvement method based on lean thinking could help streamline the treatment of our patients referred for bone and brain metastases. METHODS: University of Michigan Health System has adopted lean thinking as a consistent approach to quality and process improvement. We applied the principles and tools of lean thinking, especially value as defined by the customer, value stream mapping processes, and one piece flow, to improve the process of delivering care to patients referred for bone or brain metastases. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: The initial evaluation of the process revealed that it was rather chaotic and highly variable. Implementation of the lean thinking principles permitted us to improve the process by cutting the number of individual steps to begin treatment from 27 to 16 and minimize variability by applying standardization. After an initial learning period, the percentage of new patients with brain or bone metastases receiving consultation, simulation, and treatment within the same day rose from 43% to nearly 95%. By implementing the ideas of lean thinking, we improved the delivery of clinical care for our patients with bone or brain metastases. We believe these principles can be applied to much of the care administered throughout our and other health care delivery areas.
PURPOSE:Patients with bone and brain metastases are among the most symptomatic nonemergency patients treated by radiation oncologists. Treatment should begin as soon as possible after the request is generated. We tested the hypothesis that the operational improvement method based on lean thinking could help streamline the treatment of our patients referred for bone and brain metastases. METHODS: University of Michigan Health System has adopted lean thinking as a consistent approach to quality and process improvement. We applied the principles and tools of lean thinking, especially value as defined by the customer, value stream mapping processes, and one piece flow, to improve the process of delivering care to patients referred for bone or brain metastases. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: The initial evaluation of the process revealed that it was rather chaotic and highly variable. Implementation of the lean thinking principles permitted us to improve the process by cutting the number of individual steps to begin treatment from 27 to 16 and minimize variability by applying standardization. After an initial learning period, the percentage of new patients with brain or bone metastases receiving consultation, simulation, and treatment within the same day rose from 43% to nearly 95%. By implementing the ideas of lean thinking, we improved the delivery of clinical care for our patients with bone or brain metastases. We believe these principles can be applied to much of the care administered throughout our and other health care delivery areas.
Authors: Gabriella C Squeo; Courtney M Lattimore; Nicole L Simone; Greg Suralik; Sunil W Dutta; Michael D Schad; Lucy Su; Bruce Libby; Einsley-Marie Janowski; Shayna L Showalter; Jennifer M Lobo; Timothy N Showalter Journal: Brachytherapy Date: 2022-02-04 Impact factor: 2.441
Authors: Janneke E van Leijen-Zeelenberg; Arianne M J Elissen; Kerstin Grube; Arno J A van Raak; Hubertus J M Vrijhoef; Bernd Kremer; Dirk Ruwaard Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2016-01-19 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Scott W Hadley; Marc L Kessler; Dale W Litzenberg; Choonik Lee; Jim Irrer; Xiaoping Chen; Eduardo Acosta; Grant Weyburne; Wayne Keranen; Kwok Lam; Elizabeth Covington; Kelly C Younge; Martha M Matuszak; Jean M Moran Journal: J Appl Clin Med Phys Date: 2016-01-08 Impact factor: 2.102
Authors: Elizabeth L Covington; Xiaoping Chen; Kelly C Younge; Choonik Lee; Martha M Matuszak; Marc L Kessler; Wayne Keranen; Eduardo Acosta; Ashley M Dougherty; Stephanie E Filpansick; Jean M Moran Journal: J Appl Clin Med Phys Date: 2016-11-08 Impact factor: 2.102
Authors: Tucker J Netherton; Dong Joo Rhee; Carlos E Cardenas; Caroline Chung; Ann H Klopp; Christine B Peterson; Rebecca M Howell; Peter A Balter; Laurence E Court Journal: Med Phys Date: 2020-09-15 Impact factor: 4.071