Aneel Damle1, Nathan Andrew2, Shubjeet Kaur3, Alan Orquiola3, Karim Alavi2, Scott R Steele4, Justin Maykel2. 1. Department of General Surgery, University of Massachusetts Medical Center, 55 Lake Avenue North, Worcester, MA, 01655, USA. aneel.damle@umassmemorial.org. 2. Division of Colon and Rectal Surgery, University of Massachusetts Medical Center, Worcester, MA, USA. 3. Department of Anesthesiology, University of Massachusetts Medical Center, Worcester, MA, USA. 4. Division of Colon and Rectal Surgery, University Hospitals-Case Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Lean processes involve streamlining methods and maximizing efficiency. Well established in the manufacturing industry, they are increasingly being applied to health care. The objective of this study was to determine feasibility and effectiveness of applying Lean principles to an academic medical center colonoscopy unit. METHODS: Lean process improvement involved training endoscopy personnel, observing patients, mapping the value stream, analyzing patient flow, designing and implementing new processes, and finally re-observing the process. Our primary endpoint was total colonoscopy time (minutes from check-in to discharge) with secondary endpoints of individual segment times and unit colonoscopy capacity. RESULTS: A total of 217 patients were included (November 2013-May 2014), with 107 pre-Lean and 110 post-Lean intervention. Pre-Lean total colonoscopy time was 134 min. After implementation of the Lean process, mean colonoscopy time decreased by 10 % to 121 min (p = 0.01). The three steps of the process affected by the Lean intervention (time to achieve adequate sedation, time to recovery, and time to discharge) decreased from 3.7 to 2.4 min (p < 0.01), 4.0 to 3.4 min (p = 0.09), and 41.2 to 35.4 min (p = 0.05), respectively. Overall, unit capacity of colonoscopies increased from 39.6 per day to 43.6. Post-Lean patient satisfaction surveys demonstrated an average score of 4.5/5.0 (n = 73) regarding waiting time, 4.9/5.0 (n = 60) regarding how favorably this experienced compared to prior colonoscopy experiences, and 4.9/5.0 (n = 74) regarding professionalism of staff. One hundred percentage of respondents (n = 69) stated they would recommend our institution to a friend for colonoscopy. DISCUSSION: With no additional utilization of resources, a single Lean process improvement cycle increased productivity and capacity of our colonoscopy unit. We expect this to result in increased patient access and revenue while maintaining patient satisfaction. We believe these results are widely generalizable to other colonoscopy units as well as other process-based interventions in health care.
OBJECTIVE: Lean processes involve streamlining methods and maximizing efficiency. Well established in the manufacturing industry, they are increasingly being applied to health care. The objective of this study was to determine feasibility and effectiveness of applying Lean principles to an academic medical center colonoscopy unit. METHODS: Lean process improvement involved training endoscopy personnel, observing patients, mapping the value stream, analyzing patient flow, designing and implementing new processes, and finally re-observing the process. Our primary endpoint was total colonoscopy time (minutes from check-in to discharge) with secondary endpoints of individual segment times and unit colonoscopy capacity. RESULTS: A total of 217 patients were included (November 2013-May 2014), with 107 pre-Lean and 110 post-Lean intervention. Pre-Lean total colonoscopy time was 134 min. After implementation of the Lean process, mean colonoscopy time decreased by 10 % to 121 min (p = 0.01). The three steps of the process affected by the Lean intervention (time to achieve adequate sedation, time to recovery, and time to discharge) decreased from 3.7 to 2.4 min (p < 0.01), 4.0 to 3.4 min (p = 0.09), and 41.2 to 35.4 min (p = 0.05), respectively. Overall, unit capacity of colonoscopies increased from 39.6 per day to 43.6. Post-Lean patient satisfaction surveys demonstrated an average score of 4.5/5.0 (n = 73) regarding waiting time, 4.9/5.0 (n = 60) regarding how favorably this experienced compared to prior colonoscopy experiences, and 4.9/5.0 (n = 74) regarding professionalism of staff. One hundred percentage of respondents (n = 69) stated they would recommend our institution to a friend for colonoscopy. DISCUSSION: With no additional utilization of resources, a single Lean process improvement cycle increased productivity and capacity of our colonoscopy unit. We expect this to result in increased patient access and revenue while maintaining patient satisfaction. We believe these results are widely generalizable to other colonoscopy units as well as other process-based interventions in health care.
Entities:
Keywords:
Colonoscopy; Lean; Process improvement; Quality improvement
Authors: Ryan M Collar; Andrew G Shuman; Sandra Feiner; Amy K McGonegal; Natalie Heidel; Mary Duck; Scott A McLean; John E Billi; David W Healy; Carol R Bradford Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2012-06 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Robert R Cima; Michael J Brown; James R Hebl; Robin Moore; James C Rogers; Anantha Kollengode; Gwendolyn J Amstutz; Cheryl A Weisbrod; Bradly J Narr; Claude Deschamps Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2011-03-21 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Hermann Brenner; Jenny Chang-Claude; Christoph M Seiler; Til Stürmer; Michael Hoffmeister Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2007-03-02 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Jeff E Mandel; Jonathan W Tanner; Gary R Lichtenstein; David C Metz; David A Katzka; Gregory G Ginsberg; Michael L Kochman Journal: Anesth Analg Date: 2008-02 Impact factor: 5.108
Authors: Juan A Marin-Garcia; Pilar I Vidal-Carreras; Julio J Garcia-Sabater Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-01-22 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Diego Tlapa; Guilherme Tortorella; Flavio Fogliatto; Maneesh Kumar; Alejandro Mac Cawley; Roberto Vassolo; Luis Enberg; Yolanda Baez-Lopez Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-07-25 Impact factor: 4.614