Katy E French1, Heidi W Albright2, John C Frenzel3, James R Incalcaterra4, Augustin C Rubio3, Jessica F Jones2, Thomas W Feeley3. 1. The Division of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA. Electronic address: KEFrench@mdanderson.org. 2. The Institute for Cancer Care Innovation, the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA. 3. The Division of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA. 4. The Department of Business Analytics, the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX 77030, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The value and impact of process improvement initiatives are difficult to quantify. We describe the use of time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) in a clinical setting to quantify the value of process improvements in terms of cost, time and personnel resources. PROBLEM: Difficulty in identifying and measuring the cost savings of process improvement initiatives in a Preoperative Assessment Center (PAC). GOALS: Use TDABC to measure the value of process improvement initiatives that reduce the costs of performing a preoperative assessment while maintaining the quality of the assessment. STRATEGY: Apply the principles of TDABC in a PAC to measure the value, from baseline, of two phases of performance improvement initiatives and determine the impact of each implementation in terms of cost, time and efficiency. RESULTS: Through two rounds of performance improvements, we quantified an overall reduction in time spent by patient and personnel of 33% that resulted in a 46% reduction in the costs of providing care in the center. The performance improvements resulted in a 17% decrease in the total number of full time equivalents (FTE's) needed to staff the center and a 19% increase in the numbers of patients assessed in the center. Quality of care, as assessed by the rate of cancellations on the day of surgery, was not adversely impacted by the process improvements.
BACKGROUND: The value and impact of process improvement initiatives are difficult to quantify. We describe the use of time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) in a clinical setting to quantify the value of process improvements in terms of cost, time and personnel resources. PROBLEM: Difficulty in identifying and measuring the cost savings of process improvement initiatives in a Preoperative Assessment Center (PAC). GOALS: Use TDABC to measure the value of process improvement initiatives that reduce the costs of performing a preoperative assessment while maintaining the quality of the assessment. STRATEGY: Apply the principles of TDABC in a PAC to measure the value, from baseline, of two phases of performance improvement initiatives and determine the impact of each implementation in terms of cost, time and efficiency. RESULTS: Through two rounds of performance improvements, we quantified an overall reduction in time spent by patient and personnel of 33% that resulted in a 46% reduction in the costs of providing care in the center. The performance improvements resulted in a 17% decrease in the total number of full time equivalents (FTE's) needed to staff the center and a 19% increase in the numbers of patients assessed in the center. Quality of care, as assessed by the rate of cancellations on the day of surgery, was not adversely impacted by the process improvements.
Authors: Nikhil G Thaker; Thomas J Pugh; Usama Mahmood; Seungtaek Choi; Tracy E Spinks; Neil E Martin; Terence T Sio; Rajat J Kudchadker; Robert S Kaplan; Deborah A Kuban; David A Swanson; Peter F Orio; Michael J Zelefsky; Brett W Cox; Louis Potters; Thomas A Buchholz; Thomas W Feeley; Steven J Frank Journal: Brachytherapy Date: 2016-02-23 Impact factor: 2.362
Authors: Olivia Allin; Richard D Urman; Angela F Edwards; Jeanna D Blitz; Kurt J Pfeifer; Thomas W Feeley; Angela M Bader Journal: J Med Syst Date: 2019-12-11 Impact factor: 4.460
Authors: Katy E French; Iris Recinos; Alexis B Guzman; Thomas A Aloia; Mike Hernandez; Spencer S Kee; Alicia M Kowalski; Farzin Goravanchi; Jeffrey Cerny; Karen V Cleckler-Hughes; Elizabeth Rebello Journal: J Oncol Pract Date: 2019-01-07 Impact factor: 3.840
Authors: Nikhil G Thaker; Tariq N Ali; Michael E Porter; Thomas W Feeley; Robert S Kaplan; Steven J Frank Journal: J Oncol Pract Date: 2016-08-30 Impact factor: 3.840
Authors: Ryan K McBain; Gregory Jerome; Fernet Leandre; Micaela Browning; Jonathan Warsh; Mahek Shah; Bipin Mistry; Peterson Abnis I Faure; Claire Pierre; Anna P Fang; Jean Claude Mugunga; Gary Gottlieb; Joseph Rhatigan; Robert Kaplan Journal: Bull World Health Organ Date: 2017-11-16 Impact factor: 9.408
Authors: Navraj S Nagra; Elena Tsangaris; Jessica Means; Michael J Hassett; Laura S Dominici; Jennifer R Bellon; Justin Broyles; Robert S Kaplan; Thomas W Feeley; Andrea L Pusic Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2021-08-10 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Nikhil G Thaker; David Boyce-Fappiano; Matthew S Ning; Dario Pasalic; Alexis Guzman; Grace Smith; Emma B Holliday; James Incalcaterra; Adam S Garden; Simona F Shaitelman; G Brandon Gunn; C David Fuller; Pierre Blanchard; Thomas W Feeley; Robert S Kaplan; Steven J Frank Journal: Int J Part Ther Date: 2021-06-25