| Literature DB >> 34886029 |
Simona Andreea Apostu1,2, Valentina Vasile2, Cristina Veres3.
Abstract
Important in testing services in medical laboratories is the creation of a flexible balance between quality-response time and minimizing the cost of the service. Beyond the different Lean methods implemented so far in the medical sector, each company can adapt the model according to its needs, each company has its own specifics and organizational culture, and Lean implementation will have a unique approach. Therefore, this paper aims to identify the concerns of specialists and laboratory medical services sector initiatives in optimizing medical services by implementing the Lean Six Sigma method in its various variants: a comparative analysis of the implemented models, with emphasis on measuring externalities and delimiting trends in reforming/modernizing the method, a comprehensive approach to the impact of this method implementation, and an analysis of available databases in order to underline the deficit and information asymmetry. The results highlighted that in the case of clinical laboratories, the Lean Six Sigma method is conducive to a reduction of cases of diagnostic errors and saves time but also faces challenges and employees' resistance in implementation.Entities:
Keywords: Lean Six Sigma; bibliometric analysis; clinical laboratory; healthcare; regression analysis
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34886029 PMCID: PMC8657048 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph182312309
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
WoS papers focused on LSS implementation in medical laboratories.
| No. | Authors. Article Title. Year [Reference] | Area. Place | Method. Mentioned Instruments | Positive Effects | Negative Effects |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Durur, F., & Akbulut, Y. Lean Methodology for Pathology Laboratories: A Case Study from a Public Hospital. 2019 [ | Pathology laboratory of a public hospital. Ankara, Turkey | A five-phase plan: the support of senior management, observation, training of employees, VSM drawing, and VSM map creation. VSM, fishbone diagram, and Pareto analysis, 5S | Decrease of waiting time and increase of sample number | Lean management philosophy takes a long time to adopt |
| 2 | Isack, H.D., Mutingi, M., Kandjeke, H., Vashishth, A., et al. Exploring the adoption of Lean principles in medical laboratory industry Empirical evidences from Namibia. 2018 [ | Medical laboratories. Namibia | A seven-step implementation strategy is proposed. Standard operating procedures, root cause analysis, overall equipment effectiveness, visual management, PDCA (Plan-Do-Check-Act) cycle, inventory control cards, Fishbone diagram, 5 Whys, Pareto analysis | Quality improvement, operational performance, turnaround time, customer retention/satisfaction, market share, employee motivation, cost reduction, and reduced waste. The main enablers are top management involvement, adequate training, and proper planning. | Major barriers are a lack of support from management, financial constraints, and staff resistance to change. |
| 3 | Letelier, P., Guzmán N., Medina G., et al. Workflow optimization in a clinical laboratory using lean management principles in the pre-analytical phase. 2020 [ | Clinical laboratory. Temuco, Chile | Not mentioned. By deduction: 1. Pre-intervention Lean training 2. Intervention and data collection and analysis 3. New workflow, Workflow analysis, and Kaizen event | A reduction in turnaround times, improvement in the delivery time of test results, optimizing teamwork and assertive communication. | In the analytical and post-analytical phases (not intervened), an increase in turnaround times was observed in some cases. |
| 4 | Kovach, J.V., & Ingle, D. Using Lean Six Sigma to Reduce Patient Cycle Time in a Nonprofit Community Clinic. Quality Management in Health Care. 2019 [ | Nonprofit healthcare clinic. Texas | Lean-oriented process analysis tools/methods within Lean Six Sigma’s DMAIC, brainstorming, interview, swim-lane diagram/cross-functional flowchart, process map, SIPOC, FMEA, training, and visual management tools. A nine-step plan is described in the article. | Reducing patient cycle time by 22% and increasing patient visit capacity, reduction of patient wait time, increased appointment availability, increased quality of patient care, and increased clinic’s patient visits by 27%. | Quick exhaustion of resourcefulness in previous similar projects. |
| 5 | Moran, M.E., Sedorovich, A., Kish, J., Gothard, A., et al. Addressing Behavioral Health Concerns in Trauma: Using Lean Six Sigma to Implement a Depression Screening Protocol in a Level I Trauma Center. 2020 [ | Trauma center. Midwest United States | LSS DMADV. Project charter, MGP (Multigenerational Plan), VOC CTQ, focus group, questionnaire | PHQ-2 document location compliance increased from 60.74% to 80.56% and enhanced focus on patient behavioral health concerns, which resulted in a significant increase in CLP interventions. | Risks of biases specific to the region and institution as a whole, which may limit the generalizability. |
| 6 | Ahmed, S., Abd Manaf, N.H., & Islam, R. Effects of Six Sigma initiatives in Malaysian private hospitals. 2018 [ | Eight private hospitals. Malaysia | Questionnaire study on Six Sigma effects | Six Sigma methodology binds all operational activities together and links the strategic and the operational level in a private hospital. Improves quality and business performance. | Hospital management should invest time to understand Six Sigma initiatives and incorporate them into management oversight and strategic planning for the continuous improvement of quality performance. |
| 7 | Ahmed, S., Abd Manaf, N.H., & Islam, R. Effect of Lean Six Sigma on Quality Performance in Malaysian Hospitals. 2018 [ | 15 hospitals. Malaysia | Questionnaire study. Control chart, histogram, Pareto chart, scatter diagram, PDCA, root cause analysis (RCA), balanced scorecard, benchmarking, 5 S, and five whys. | LSS and workforce management have a significant impact on the quality performance of Malaysian hospitals, whereas senior management commitment was found to have an insignificant relationship with quality performance. | Proper planning, prioritization, resource allocation, budgeting, training, and proper review and reward mechanisms are required as well as informal strategies to enhance relationships. |
| 8 | Persis, D.J., S., A., Sunder, M.V., G., R. Sreedharan, V.R., & Saikouk, T. Improving patient care at a multi-speciality hospital using Lean Six Sigma. 2020 [ | Multi-speciality hospital. India | SDMMAICS (Select–Define–MeasureMap–Analyze–Improve–Control–Sustain), interview questionnaire, force field analysis, project charter, I-chart, VSM, process flowchart, Fishbone diagram, Pareto chart, and cost–benefit analysis, brainstorming, and virtual queuing model | Removed bottlenecks and improved key performance metrics: patient turnaround time (TAT), workforce utilization, and organizational profits, reduced staff and teams’ idle time with an annual saving of USD 44,000. | Criticisms and drawbacks review presented in the article. |
| 9 | Geerlinks, A.V., Digout, C., Bernstein, M., Chan, A., MacPhee, S., Pambrun, C., et al. Improving Time to Antibiotics for Pediatric Oncology Patients With Fever and Suspected Neutropenia by Applying Lean Principles. 2018 [ | Pediatric Oncology. Tertiary care pediatric hospital. NovaScotia, Canada | DMAIC. VSM | Quality indicator: improve Time-to-Antibiotics (TTA) for children with chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia (from median of 99 to 59 min). Patients treated within 60 min improved from 12% to 47%, and those treated within 90 min from 39% to 74%. | Not mentioned |
| 10 | Randell, E.W., Short, G., Lee, N., Beresford, A., Spencer, M., Kennell, M., et al. Autoverification process improvement by Six Sigma approach: Clinical chemistry & immunoassay, 2018 [ | Clinical chemistry and immunoassay. Three clinical laboratories. Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada | DMAIC | Over 890% increase in overall test and sample auto verification, improved turnaround time, and reduced time for manual verification. Mean weekly time MLTs spent reviewing results decreased from 16,785 ± 5461 ( | Manual review time increased from 7.1 ± 3.9 s to 21.0 ± 7.1 s |
| 12 | De Oliveira, K.B., dos Santos, E.F., & Junior, L.V.G. Lean Healthcare as a Tool for Improvement: A Case Study in a Clinical Laboratory, 2017 [ | Clinical Pathology and Pathological Anatomy, SaoPaulo State, Brasil | Process understanding, VSM, Design an Improvement plan | Future increase in added value in a future scenario to their services, reducing or eliminating waste in processes and increasing customer satisfaction, mainly by reducing waiting time. | Not mentioned |
Figure 1Most common words in scientific publications.
Figure 2Word network in medical scientific publication content.
Figure 3Number of clinical laboratories all over the world in 2018–2020.
Figure 4Number of surveillance sites, Africa, 2017–2020.
Figure 5Number of surveillance sites, America, 2017–2020.
Figure 6Number of surveillance sites, Eastern Mediterranean, 2017–2020.
Figure 7Number of surveillance sites, Europe, 2017–2020.
Figure 8Number of surveillance sites, South-East Africa, 2017–2020.
Figure 9Number of surveillance sites, Western Pacific, 2017–2020.
Correlation matrix, Africa.
| Hospitals | In- and Outpatient Facilities | Laboratories | Outpatient Facilities | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hospitals | 1 | |||
| In- and Outpatient Facilities | 1 | |||
| Laboratories | 0.744 | 1 | ||
| Outpatient Facilities | −0.187 | 0.489 | 1 |
* Correlation is significant at the 0.1 level (2-tailed).
Correlation matrix, America.
| Hospitals | In- and Outpatient Facilities | Laboratories | Outpatient Facilities | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hospitals | 1 | |||
| In- and Outpatient facilities | 1 | |||
| Laboratories | 1 | |||
| Outpatient Facilities | −0.99 *** | 1 |
*** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Correlation matrix, Eastern Mediterranean.
| Hospitals | In- and Outpatient Facilities | Laboratories | Outpatient Facilities | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hospitals | 1 | |||
| In- and Outpatient facilities | 1 | |||
| Laboratories | −0.084 | 1 | ||
| Outpatient Facilities | 0.309 | −0.978 *** | 1 |
*** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Correlation matrix, Europe.
| Hospitals | In- and Outpatient Facilities | Laboratories | Outpatient Facilities | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hospitals | 1 | |||
| In- and outpatient facilities | 1 | 1 | ||
| Laboratories | 0.567 | 0.695 | 1 | |
| Outpatient facilities | 0.977 | 0.200 | 0.702 *** | 1 |
*** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Correlation matrix, South-East Africa.
| Hospitals | In- and Outpatient Facilities | Laboratories | Outpatient Facilities | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hospitals | 1 | |||
| In- and Outpatient facilities | 0.995 * | 1 | ||
| Laboratories | −0.137 | −0.038 | 1 | |
| Outpatient facilities | 0.891 ** | 0.932 | 0.327 | 1 |
*, ** Correlation is significant at the 0.1 level (2-tailed) and at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
Correlation matrix, Western Pacific.
| Hospitals | In- and Outpatient Facilities | Laboratories | Outpatient Facilities | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hospitals | 1 | |||
| In- and Outpatient facilities | 0.885 * | 1 | ||
| Laboratories | 1 | |||
| Outpatient Facilities | −0.983 | −0.854 | 1 |
* Correlation is significant at the 0.1 level (2-tailed).
Correlation matrix, all over the world.
| Hospitals | In- and Outpatient Facilities | Laboratories | Outpatient Facilities | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hospitals | 1 | |||
| In- and Outpatient facilities | −0.063 | 1 | ||
| Laboratories | 0.931 | −0.073 * | 1 | |
| Outpatient Facilities | 0.372 | −0.003 | 0.058 * | 1 |
* Correlation is significant at the 0.1 level (2-tailed).
Regression Statistics.
| Multiple R | 0.984075 |
| R Square | 0.968403 |
| Adjusted R Square | 0.921008 |
| Standard Error | 101.1219 |
| Observations | 6 |
ANOVA.
| df | SS | MS | F | Significance F | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Regression | 3 | 626,809.8 | 208,936.6 | 20.43264 | 0.047019 |
| Residual | 2 | 20,451.26 | 10,225.63 | ||
| Total | 5 | 647,261.1 |
Regression coefficients.
| Coefficients | Standard Error | t Stat | Lower 95% | Upper 95% | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intercept | 140.5385 | 65.38541 | 2.149386 | 0.164609 | −140.792 | 421.8692 |
| In- and Outpatient facilities | 0.000786 | 0.018965 | 0.04146 | 0.970696 | −0.08082 | 0.082388 |
| Clinical Laboratories | 0.697335 | 0.096426 | 7.231833 | 0.018589 | 0.282448 | 1.112221 |
| Outpatient Facilities | 0.636223 | 0.250949 | 2.535271 | 0.126682 | −0.44352 | 1.715968 |